The Trial of Albert Tanzband

[Michael McBride]

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.

OOC: And my asking for the publication of the "rules" to your "legal system" is conveniently ignored. Why? My guess is that there simply aren't any.

[Uberstein]

OOC: And my asking for the publication of the "rules" to your "legal system" is conveniently ignored. Why? My guess is that there simply aren't any.

OOC: I posted them. I'm not some sort of god, I take time to type.

Edited July 8, 2009 by BaronUberstein

[Lavo]

OOC: Alright, let me settle this. Uber, ether post up your law system, with details, or what RL country (or countries) it is based off of. While I am no fan of this bickering, I agree with Pravus that clarification on the law system in play is needed.

[Michael McBride]

OOC: I posted them. I'm not some sort of god, I take time to type.

OOC: You mean this?

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.

Because those aren't rules. That is basically how almost every western culture runs their court system in a nutshell. Rules are things like juries asking questions, objections, hostile witness, witnesses period, cross rules, etc. THOSE are rules.

NINJAEDIT: I've seen that a GM has made a ruling on this so I shall say nothing further for the time being.

[Uberstein]

OOC: Alright, let me settle this. Uber, ether post up your law system, with details, or what RL country (or countries) it is based off of. While I am no fan of this bickering, I agree with Pravus that clarification on the law system in play is needed.

OOC: A direct copy from another post of mine:

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.

That is the essence of the system. There is no death sentence. There is no sentence length limit, but I won't go past 200 years.

AJ might be able to add on more, but we are trying to keep it simple.

Edited July 8, 2009 by BaronUberstein

[Botha]

The Republic of Transvaal announced today that it denounced these show trials as "trumped-up victor's revenge".

"Our government will aid and grant refugee status for exile to any condemned Nordlander that can make their way to Transvaal" stated Field Marshal Petrus Malan to the Volksraad today, in its final session just prior to his forth-coming overseas tour.

[Uberstein]

The Republic of Transvaal announced today that it denounced these show trials as "trumped-up victor's revenge".

"Our government will aid and grant refugee status for exile to any condemned Nordlander that can make their way to Transvaal" stated Field Marshal Petrus Malan to the Volksraad today, in its final session just prior to his forth-coming overseas tour.

The Republic of Mariehamm states that harboring international criminals/terrorists could be seen as an act of war.

[Michael McBride]

OOC: A direct copy from another post of mine:

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.

That is the essence of the system. There is no death sentence. There is no sentence length limit, but I won't go past 200 years.

AJ might be able to add on more, but we are trying to keep it simple.

OOC: Again, those are not rules. They are bare-bones procedures at best. There are no clauses for witnesses, objections, hearsay, anything that is essential to even the most BASIC legal system.

[King Kevz]

The Republic of Mariehamm states that harboring international criminals/terrorists could be seen as an act of war.

Pax Pacis would like to state that they arn't international criminals or terrorists that is just how the Republic of Mariehamm and its allies see them.

[Uberstein]

Pax Pacis would like to state that they arn't international criminals or terrorists that is just how the Republic of Mariehamm and its allies see them.

And we will pursue them to the ends of the earth. Criminals cannot go free.

[Il Terra Di Agea]

OOC: Alright, let me settle this. Uber, ether post up your law system, with details, or what RL country (or countries) it is based off of. While I am no fan of this bickering, I agree with Pravus that clarification on the law system in play is needed.

OOC: As this is going on in my nation, I'll clarify the system:

1: Person is charged

2: Person goes to court

3: Court precedings go down

4: Impartial jury of their peers decides whether they are guilty or not guilty (They may suggest a sentence, but the judge is not required to respect it

5: Judge gives a sentence, based on the crimes committed

6: Accused either goes to a camp to work until they can make an appeal, or work until they are unable, at which point they serve their sentence in a hospital room

7 (If appeal is allowed): Trial is essentially repeated, except the defense uses the work that the accused did to prove they have been rehabilitated. Unless otherwise specified, the accused has unlimited appeals.

Sentence can be any length, and because law states that charges are cumulative, a serial offender can have very long times. Death penalty is saved for the criminally insane who are incapable of working without causing harm to themselves or others.

EDIT: By the way, if there is a hung jury, it means retrial, they don't walk, they go to a small jail to wait for their next trial. They wouldn't want a hung jury, at least with a first trial, you can go out, and do things, rather than sit in a cell eating powdered eggs. Hell, that is even worse than prison in my nation, in prison, the worst you get is having to work in "Prison Towns," where you would learn to work in a community, an old, 1600's style community. You get a doctor who isn't an inamate, and a warden, who isn't an inmate. You are surrounded by walls, with roving guards. It's cheap, and nice. It's like a retirement plan, except you are surrounded by murderers,.

That's the basic outline, and Uber's sentence fits to the laws

Edited July 8, 2009 by Il Terra Di Agea

[iamthey]

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: Aside from the fact that I personally think the concept of "crimes against humanity" is a total !@#$%^&* creation of the west to basically justify invasions; and I find america's justice system to be totally screwed up anyway... I happen to agree with PI on this one, for political crimes I find a sentence like that a bit high. But we've already been down this path, I argued the matter extensively a month or so ago. Anyway carry on.

EDIT: @ PI: If you don't like the sentence that much then let the defense make that one of their arguments. That has been done before, and people have been acquitted on that basis.

Edited July 8, 2009 by iamthey

[Botha]

And we will pursue them to the ends of the earth.

...or as far south as the Botha Line

[Subtleknifewielder]

"Whether or not the world sees them as such, their nation did commit many crimes. Who is responsible for what is what these trials are supposed to determine."

[Uberstein]

...or as far south as the Botha Line

OOC: The Kansainvälinen exist for a reason.

[Michael McBride]

OOC: As this is going on in my nation, I'll clarify the system:

1: Person is charged

2: Person goes to court

3: Court precedings go down

4: Impartial jury of their peers decides whether they are guilty or not guilty (They may suggest a sentence, but the judge is not required to respect it

5: Judge gives a sentence, based on the crimes committed

6: Accused either goes to a camp to work until they can make an appeal, or work until they are unable, at which point they serve their sentence in a hospital room

7 (If appeal is allowed): Trial is essentially repeated, except the defense uses the work that the accused did to prove they have been rehabilitated. Unless otherwise specified, the accused has unlimited appeals.

Sentence can be any length, and because law states that charges are cumulative, a serial offender can have very long times. Death penalty is saved for the criminally insane who are incapable of working without causing harm to themselves or others.

That's the basic outline, and Uber's sentence fits to the laws

OOC: Again, these are PROCEDURES, not RULES. This is exactly why you need legal knowledge to do something like this. I'll repeat myself, rules are things governing witnesses, objections, cross, jury questions, etc. Further your procedures have no room for witnesses, and, based on Uber's sentence, places the burden of guilt on the accused, rather than the accuser, making it a "guilty until proven innocent" system instead of the other way around.

[King Kevz]

"Whether or not the world sees them as such, their nation did commit many crimes. Who is responsible for what is what these trials are supposed to determine."

"There crimes which still need to be clarified?"

[Uberstein]

"There crimes which still need to be clarified?"

"The last we checked, Pax Pacis (sp?) had no part in the war, and no right to any information regarding these trials."

[Il Terra Di Agea]

OOC: Again, these are PROCEDURES, not RULES. This is exactly why you need legal knowledge to do something like this. I'll repeat myself, rules are things governing witnesses, objections, cross, jury questions, etc. Further your procedures have no room for witnesses, and, based on Uber's sentence, places the burden of guilt on the accused, rather than the accuser, making it a "guilty until proven innocent" system instead of the other way around.

OOC: And that's what it is, guilty until proven innocent at least makes sure you go in if you are guilty. You want more info? I'll edit this post with it, give me some time.

A grab bag of rules:

Witnesses: Person who comes to court and swears under oath to give truthful evidence. One who, being sworn or affirmed, according to law, deposes as to his knowledge of facts in issue between the parties in a cause.

In another sense by witness is understood one who is called upon to be present at a transaction, as a wedding, or the making of a will. When a person signs his name to an instrument, as a deed, a bond, and the like, to signify that the same was executed in his presence, he is called an attesting witness.

In this case, there are no witnesses, as it would not only elongate the precedings, but also fall to the same crap that things like protests do in CNRP, the person RPing will almost always choose their own views to represent with their rped witness. We have a lot of the trials to do, and the time to do them will already be long.

Jury is to be silent until the sparring section, at which point they may anonymously submit questions to the judge, who will check them for profanity, and that they are pertinent, at which point the judge will administer them.

Both sides are expected to be silent unless spoken to until sparring, at which point they both make a quick speech, before commencing argument.

I don't have legal experience, keep that in mind. Also keep in mind, that you are really the only one making a huge fuss about this. Sure, there are other complaints, but stop it with the whining, I don't have time to write up an entire, indepth legal system for my nation. I highly doubt anyone has written an in depth system for their courts. )):

Edited July 8, 2009 by Il Terra Di Agea

[Michael McBride]

"The last we checked, Pax Pacis (sp?) had no part in the war, and no right to any information regarding these trials."

"So the world at large has no right to know what happens at the trials of, who you say, are the biggest war criminals in the world simply because they were not involved in the war? What are you trying to hide?"

-Bill Worthington

Consul of State

Xaristan

[King Kevz]

"The last we checked, Pax Pacis (sp?) had no part in the war, and no right to any information regarding these trials."

OOC: Correct spellign Baron

IC: "Pax Pacis is attending the trial as a third party neutral peace keepers to ensure that the accussed are treated and sentanced fairly"

[Lavo]

OOC: And that's what it is, guilty until proven innocent at least makes sure you go in if you are guilty. You want more info? I'll edit this post with it, give me some time.

OOC: This would be useful, and hopefully will answer everyone's questions and concerns.

[Michael McBride]

OOC: And that's what it is, guilty until proven innocent at least makes sure you go in if you are guilty. You want more info? I'll edit this post with it, give me some time.

OOC: That is one of the worst systems ever contrived and is an insult to those who actually work in the name of justice everywhere. That just allows you to use it as a convenient cover for your shortcomings in the legal realm should you get beaten by a superior argument that casts reasonable doubt.

I move for these trials to be tossed out by a GM and new ones started, by an actual impartial party, with a legal system that is not so biased it is disgusting.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Pravus Ingruo

[King Kevz]

OOC: That is one of the worst systems ever contrived and is an insult to those who actually work in the name of justice everywhere. That just allows you to use it as a convenient cover for your shortcomings in the legal realm should you get beaten by a superior argument that casts reasonable doubt.

I move for these trials to be tossed out by a GM and new ones started, by an actual impartial party, with a legal system that is not so biased it is disgusting.

OOC: NO. Sorry but you can't if they did this system then they can because it is their characters, their system and their roleplay thus they could if they wished have a one sided trial system if they wanted.

[Uberstein]

"So the world at large has no right to know what happens at the trials of, who you say, are the biggest war criminals in the world simply because they were not involved in the war? What are you trying to hide?"

-Bill Worthington

Consul of State

Xaristan

"Maybe if they asked POLITELY instead of demanding such things with an air of arrogance, we would respond nicely. Has the world forgotten about diplomacy?"

OOC: That is one of the worst systems ever contrived and is an insult to those who actually work in the name of justice everywhere. That just allows you to use it as a convenient cover for your shortcomings in the legal realm should you get beaten by a superior argument that casts reasonable doubt.

I move for these trials to be tossed out by a GM and new ones started, by an actual impartial party, with a legal system that is not so biased it is disgusting.

OOC: It's called RP.