JEDCJT Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Madoff's sentence is a joke, first off. And secondly, the most anyone has ever gotten for a war crimes trial (besides death, which isn't an option here) is life imprisonment. Which would be 75 years, tops. 200 is extreme and unnecessary. A little digging finds that anyone who didn't get life in prison, only got a max of 20 years. If you continue on this path, expect to have multiple hung juries on your hands, and I'm serious about that. OOC: Hm, I believe someone got about 365 years, and that was back in 1977. That's more than 200 years, so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Feliks, the guy who created the character, said it was fine. Just ask him.Also, this isn't the AMERICAN Legal system. This is a system we created specifically for this trial. OOC: Sure as hell looks like the American legal system. Again, my protest stands that you are far too biased and have far too little legal knowledge to be an effective judge for this trial. OOC: Enough OOC Please!!! Don't like it deal with it IC. OOC: Hey Kevz. Shut the $%&@ up. K? We're debating something that is intrinsic to the rest of the trials. And I cannot do anything about it IC since I am a juror, so I'm doing it OOC. OOC: Hm, I believe someone got about 365 years, and that was back in 1977. That's more than 200 years, so... OOC: If you can find a link, that'd be helpful, because I looked and couldn't find that and I've never heard of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Those 365 years most likely resulted from a metric !@#$ ton of crimes that slowly stacked up. There was this one girl that got charged with about $20,000,000 worth of fines for stealing credit card information because she got the maximum small fine like two thousand times. @Kevz: shut up, seriously. none of our nations are actually at the trial - just a bunch of jurors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: If you can find a link, that'd be helpful, because I looked and couldn't find that and I've never heard of that. OOC: Here ya go. Edited July 8, 2009 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: Here ya go. OOC: On June 12, 1978, he was sentenced to six life sentences in prison for the murders, making his maximum term 365 years. He was sentenced to six life terms for six murders - not 365 years for a single crime. Edited July 8, 2009 by Sargun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavo Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Tens of millions did die by the Nords - the nuclear holocaust they started completely destroyed the Rebel Army - and that's just one country. OOC: Actually, it was the Greater German Empire that started the genocidal nuclear war against me. All those responsible for that were sent to the RA with the capitulation of Germany after Visari's nuking of Hansa. And they have been dealt with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC:He was sentenced to six life terms for six murders - not 365 years for a single crime. OOC: Well, you get the idea. It is possible for someone to be sentenced to about 200 years or more in prison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Actually, it was the Greater German Empire that started the genocidal nuclear war against me. All those responsible for that were sent to the RA with the capitulation of Germany after Visari's nuking of Hansa. And they have been dealt with. OOC: Stop with your logic. I have an obvious bias against these men and I'll go out of my way to do it! (also, someone already told me this) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Sure as hell looks like the American legal system. Again, my protest stands that you are far too biased and have far too little legal knowledge to be an effective judge for this trial. OOC: It's BASED on the American legal system. But it is NOT the American legal system. Did YOU come up with the trials? No? Then please allow those who actually took the time to think this up to use the system we have posted. Please provide PROOF that I am biased, otherwise I will have to ask you to sit down, be quiet, and let my character do their job. I don't need any RL legal knowledge to do this, because this isn't a RL legal system. This is a system AJ and I made up. Be glad we didn't take several people's suggestions and remove the jury (I have always pushed for a jury to decide guilt so that one person doesn't decide it). Also, I didn't ask for the job of Judge, that was assigned to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Here ya go. OOC: As Sargun already posted: On June 12, 1978, he was sentenced to six life sentences in prison for the murders, making his maximum term 365 years. You know what each term came to? 60.83 years. So, for a murder with no death penalty, the maximum is 60.83 years, according to this. Thank you, JED, for providing even more evidence against the Baron's retarded legal views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Well, you get the idea. It is possible for someone to be sentenced to about 200 years or more in prison. OOC: He was a serial killer who attacked thirteen people and killed six of them. In reality he was given life sentences for each of his killings - not "365 years". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: As Sargun already posted: On June 12, 1978, he was sentenced to six life sentences in prison for the murders, making his maximum term 365 years.You know what each term came to? 60.83 years. So, for a murder with no death penalty, the maximum is 60.83 years, according to this. Thank you, JED, for providing even more evidence against the Baron's retarded legal views. OOC: You know, we don't have to let you on the jury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: As Sargun already posted: On June 12, 1978, he was sentenced to six life sentences in prison for the murders, making his maximum term 365 years.You know what each term came to? 60.83 years. So, for a murder with no death penalty, the maximum is 60.83 years, according to this. Thank you, JED, for providing even more evidence against the Baron's retarded legal views. OOC: Heh, I'm not against Uberstein's legal system, and neither was I going to provide evidence against his legal views (I was only commenting, after all) - as he said, it was a system made up by him and AJ. Let's go with that, and have fun, k? Edited July 8, 2009 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: It's BASED on the American legal system. But it is NOT the American legal system. Did YOU come up with the trials? No? Then please allow those who actually took the time to think this up to use the system we have posted. Please provide PROOF that I am biased, otherwise I will have to ask you to sit down, be quiet, and let my character do their job. I don't need any RL legal knowledge to do this, because this isn't a RL legal system. This is a system AJ and I made up. Be glad we didn't take several people's suggestions and remove the jury (I have always pushed for a jury to decide guilt so that one person doesn't decide it). Also, I didn't ask for the job of Judge, that was assigned to me. OOC: Had I suggested trials? Yes? Missed that did you? Probably? Yeah, thought so. If it's BASED off the American legal system, then you should at least have SOME legal knowledge of the American legal system to run it. Also, I never said RL legal knowledge, I just said legal knowledge in general, such as proper sentencing and accepting guilty pleas and such. Your bias is clear in the fact that for ages you have railed against Nordland in Europe, so much so that it was your sole mission to see them destroyed. Why now would things suddenly change in your opinion against them. In fact, that bias will be intensified as you are now able to go after the individual characters you did not like instead of the nation itself. My protest stands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavo Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Can all of you guys please calm down a bit? It's alright for you all to discuss law IC/OOC, but you guys are nearly flaming each other. So as a GM, I'd like to insist that you guys tone it down a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: You know, we don't have to let you on the jury. OOC: Another clear example of your bias. Someone brings legitimate concerns about the way you are conducting things and the answer is "we don't have to let you on the jury". Classic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: *sighs* We need a GM ruling on this matter. Lavo and hawk, we need you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Had I suggested trials? Yes? Missed that did you? Probably? Yeah, thought so. If it's BASED off the American legal system, then you should at least have SOME legal knowledge of the American legal system to run it. Also, I never said RL legal knowledge, I just said legal knowledge in general, such as proper sentencing and accepting guilty pleas and such. Your bias is clear in the fact that for ages you have railed against Nordland in Europe, so much so that it was your sole mission to see them destroyed. Why now would things suddenly change in your opinion against them. In fact, that bias will be intensified as you are now able to go after the individual characters you did not like instead of the nation itself. My protest stands. OOC: Let me explain something. That is called ROLEPLAY. This is CYBER NATIONS ROLEPLAY. Feliks? He's a good friend of mine, we talk on MSN quite a bit. I do things incharacter, and while this may surprise some people, I try to not mix OOC and IC. I've been pushing against a blurring of the OOC/IC line since day 1. Also, by "based on", I mean there is a judge, a jury, and lawyers. It's NOT THE AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEM, YOUR RL LEGAL KNOWLEDGE IS USELESS HERE. Get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justinian the Mighty Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: Nuclear holocaust is something completely different from the actual holocaust. Trying to even compare the two makes you seem shallow and uncaring.The U.S. killed 200,000 with their bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That could be considered nuclear holocaust on those cities. By your logic, the US pilots, generals, and government should have been tried as war criminals as well. OOC: They should have well the government anyway but enough OOC lets stay IC please!!! ooc: I just want to point out to you two fine gentlemen that President Truman saved millions of lives by using the atomic bombs on Japan. The proposed invasion of the Japanese home islands during WWII would have ended very badly for both Japan and the US soldiers/civilians. Edited July 8, 2009 by Justinian the Mighty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: Another clear example of your bias. Someone brings legitimate concerns about the way you are conducting things and the answer is "we don't have to let you on the jury". Classic. OOC: It's hardly legitimate, you're citing OOC court rulings to call an IC system wrong, when they have little to no relation with each other. The reason I'm saying "we don't have to let you on the jury" is because you're yelling and screaming and calling the entire thing a fraud over something that me and Feliks have already discussed and moved on about. You're overreacting about something trivial, and we need level heads on the jury. Now, take your OOC elsewhere and stop cluttering the thread. Edited July 8, 2009 by BaronUberstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Let me explain something. That is called ROLEPLAY. This is CYBER NATIONS ROLEPLAY. Feliks? He's a good friend of mine, we talk on MSN quite a bit. I do things incharacter, and while this may surprise some people, I try to not mix OOC and IC. I've been pushing against a blurring of the OOC/IC line since day 1. Also, by "based on", I mean there is a judge, a jury, and lawyers. It's NOT THE AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEM, YOUR RL LEGAL KNOWLEDGE IS USELESS HERE. Get over it. OOC: Really, my legal knowledge is useless? Let's have an impartial third judge and I'll defend BR's character and you can play the prosecution, yes? I can guarantee I will run rings around you. Unless your system is truly unfair and twisted, then you will be owned, and I can guarantee that. Also, let's publish these legal rules that you have spent so much time working on for all to see, shall we? That way, everyone can be on a level playing field and we can all make sure that you are not trying to pull a fast one with your "made up system". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: Can all of you guys please calm down a bit? It's alright for you all to discuss law IC/OOC, but you guys are nearly flaming each other. So as a GM, I'd like to insist that you guys tone it down a bit. OOC: Quoted because people seem to have missed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 OOC: It's hardly legitimate, you're citing OOC court rulings to call an IC system wrong, when they have little to no relation with each other. The reason I'm saying "we don't have to let you on the jury" is because you're yelling and screaming and calling the entire thing a fraud over something that me and Feliks have already discussed and moved on about. You're overreacting about something trivial, and we need level heads on the jury. Now, take your OOC elsewhere and stop cluttering the thread. OOC: No, I'm citing actual legal standing, which you yourself have said that your "legal system" is based on. It cannot be based on it and yet ignore it completely, it doesn't work that way. And you can try to sugarcoat the "we don't have to let you on the jury" comment any way you want. The fact of the matter is you're trying to silence someone who disagrees with you and have turned into exactly what you hated and fought for so long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: Really, my legal knowledge is useless? Let's have an impartial third judge and I'll defend BR's character and you can play the prosecution, yes? I can guarantee I will run rings around you. Unless your system is truly unfair and twisted, then you will be owned, and I can guarantee that. Also, let's publish these legal rules that you have spent so much time working on for all to see, shall we? That way, everyone can be on a level playing field and we can all make sure that you are not trying to pull a fast one with your "made up system". OOC: Let me explain the system to you carefully. It's quite simple. We have a prosecutor say their charges against the person. The person defends themselves. The jury decides guilty or not guilty. The judge gives the sentence if guilty. If the jury can't decide, there is a retrial with a new jury. Also, I see no reason to inlcude you in this trial except the jury, and even that I'm starting to think is silly, because every sentence I make you're going to fight, even if it's resonable and nobody else has a problem with it, including the player who is getting the sentence. I don't care if you have RL legal knowledge. Now, can we continue with the damn trial or are you going to continue to call my ideas stupid and claim I'm some kind of fascist devil who can't discern between IC and OOC. Look at a log here: [13:42] Feliks: your jurors are pissed at the sentence [13:42] Baron_Überstein: oh noes, the man pleaded guilty [13:44] Baron_Überstein: If a guy IRL gets 150 years for defrauding people, I think I can give someone 200 years for war crimes. [13:44] Feliks: I agree That is the guy who actually has to RP the sentence...gasp, AGREEING THAT IT'S A GOOD SENTENCE! Edited July 8, 2009 by BaronUberstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Terra Di Agea Posted July 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) OOC: Sigh, I have a lot to say about all this. In short: Pravus, sentences like that happen in reality, they are symbolic of how god awful the committed crimes were. Crime builds up over time, and that is going to play into the sentences. If you are going to intentionally try to stop the jury from making a decision, I'll make sure you get off it. We're trying to keep this civil, and you're kind of impeding that right now. So, everyone, calm down. Of course both sides are going to blow some things out of proportion, trials do that to stories, they mess things up. Now, let's get back to the real trial. (Also, multiple life sentences in conjunction with a death sentence help avoid one fun situation that is a valid lawful argument, that if you survive a botched execution, you can walk. I'm not sure if it has ever happened in the US, but it did happen in Russia an England as part of their laws) Edited July 8, 2009 by Il Terra Di Agea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.