In response to KCCrusader's allegations against me, I am re-posting the response I made in the Citizen's sub-forum. His accusations are way out of line with what actually happened. The Court needs to realize just what took place and the efforts made to stay within procedure. Posted below is my response:
KCCrusader said:
While I initially posted against the idea in the judicial thread, I have seen by the travesty of the latest Citizen Complaint that it would protect the citizens and the game if these procedures were legalised so that trials would have to be fair in order to be accepted. Also, It seems that the affairs of the court can be "organized" by the judiciary even if the actual procedure is coded. This will also prevent the Chief Justice, or any member of the bench from setting up a system weighted against any defendant (innocent until proven guilty)
In the last (and first) CC, I encountered numerous challenges in trying to uphold my duty to defend the accused Chieftess. In Cyc's organization of the trial, as mandated by the law, the posted proceedings of the court were blatantly violated. I list the offenses here to bolster support for making court procedures official:
Broken Judicial Procedures
(list can be found here) :
8.D: At no point in this CC was I contacted by the honorable Octavian X
with regards to the charges brought against Chieftess, but rather was
left to stumble upon the charges in the judicial thread.
Sept. 27th 8:23pm
Completed. Also, my clarification is done. I for one am much happier with the result. I shall begin looking at Cheiftess's innocence soon .
Finally Thank you for your two terms as Chief Justice. You really helped me get into the groove of this demogame when I had no idea what I was supposed to do! I look forward to further participation later in the game as either CJ or an advisor post. Thanks again!
-PD KCC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyc
Also, Public Defender KCCrusader, could you post as to whether or not the CC has merit? We need to move this up to the next level.
Thanks,CJ Cyc
As you can easily see from the PM posted above, the Chief Justice PMd you about the CC. My statement at the bottom indicates further discussion, so it's plain to see you were notified. Your opinion of "Merit" for the CC came before the chronological order of the JA sending you a PM. So you didn't stumble upon it. You had already worked on it. As you know JA Octavian X had a habit of slow work in our matters, that's why I had to cover for him sometimes.
8.F:While the original investigation thread was opened by Octavian X, Chief
Justice Cyc opened the second (flawed) version.
When I saw the fiasco caused by the Defense in the first Investigation Thread, I tried for a long time to get the situation taken care of. The only reason Black_Hole had posted was inexperience. He felt he needed to clarify the charges. True he should have used the Judicial Thread for this, but as I say, he has no experience with CCs. Chieftess on the other hand was the second person to have a PI filed against them in DG1. So she has lots of experience. She posted twice in the begining of this thread claiming 3 reasons for her defense in the first post.
I had made several posts in different locations trying to get the situation rectified. Finally Rik Meleet came back and said he would delete the posts in 4 hours. What was I to do. As soon as he did this people started posting again, even through the Instructions were clearly posted at the top of the thread. I even went into the chat rooms looking for a Mod, but they never answered my requests for help. After I signed off, Moderator eyrei came to the Investigation Thread. This Investigation Thread which was opened at 11:33pm 9/27, was then closed by Moderator eyrei at 6:29pm 9/28. Post is shown below:
Moderator eyrei ~ 6:29pm 9/28
Thread closed. I hate to inconvenience the judiciary, but it will just be easiest if you open another. Please note that the 24-hour rule will be enforced by myself.
I didn't come back till later and saw the thread closed for the first time. I also noticed you had shown up and were unable to post in it because it was closed. So I opened a new thread and PMd you right away. You will notice that from the time the first thread was opened to the time it was closed, 19 hours had elapsed. This meant that the initial 24-hour period had only 5 hours left in it. The Defendant had posted twice and 8 out of the first ten posts were for the defendant. This also means that you never checked the Investigation Thread for the first 22 hours or so. None of this was planned by the Chief Justice and, in fact, I tried my best to keep within procedure. The Defense was mostly to blame for the first thread's problems
(check the thread) . Had you returned to the new Investigation Thread, as my PM asked you to, our had even come back to the forums, I'm sure you could have done a lot better job at defending CT. In the mad rush, I did my best to re-construct the first post of the second thread, I'm sorry you weren't happy with it.
8.F.1:The first two posts of the investigation thread are obviously not a
Combonation of Chieftess and myself. When I arrived to post an opening
defense, I found the invevtigation already cluttered and closed due to
the fact that people had violated this very clause (F.1). Cyc opened a
new thread dedicated to the investigation, but once again, the defense
was disenfranchised the right to present an arguement. Before a 24 hour
period had passed, the Chief Justice opened the thread to the public.
When I arrived with arguments in mind, I found the investigation cluttered
yet again! The opinion was already completely biased towards a guilty
verdict, and there was no ability to submit a defense.
As I said above, I PMd you right away. You took your time coming back, even though you knew the first thread had been closed.
And I copied the defense's first post to the second thread immediately following the charges. So CT's statement was covered.
8.I: Honorable Justice Cyc issued a message on the investigation thread
issuing the debate closed. No where in the procedings is anyone given
the power to close the investigation, especially after essentially NO
defense has been presented at all! While the thread is technically still
open, newcomers to the thread will cease reading after the "closed"
message, hindering the defendants right to a fair trial.
In the Court Procedures you worked within for two Terms and have just submitted your approval of for Term 3 is Procedure 8H.
If the accused pleads guilty, the Trial is skipped and the case moves to the Sentencing Process. The Chief Justice may close the Investigation thread early if this occurs.
There's one example of the CJ closing the Investigation Thread. So you're mistaken there. The reason I closed it was so that the citizens knew it went on to the next phase. The thread had gone past the 24 hour period for the PD and Defendant to post, yet only the Defendant showed enough interest to do so. The thread had been open far beyond the minimum 48 hours required of it. I would have thought that if you had wanted to participate AT ALL in CT's defense, you would have done so by then.
These digressions from procedure currently cannot be challenged because the proceedings are not written into law. Obviously, a defendant cannot recieve a fair trial when the procedure is allowed to be manipulated by the bench.
The procedure was manipulted by the Defense, as shown in the first thread. Strider calls his posts outright a fillibuster. He meant to disrupt the proceedings on behalf of CT. This is not my fault.
The period of time in which the investigation was closed happened to be the time I had to post my defense. The thread was not open for 48 hours continuously, therefore barring the defense (who checks in at least every 24 hours) from issuing any statements to help Chieftess.
I did not close the first thread and opened the second as soon as I could. I also PMd you right away, to which you never answered. This is not the CJ's fault either. I did the best I could considering the circumstances. Look what Strider did to the Trial Poll, the same thing.
It is in my opinion, after this egregious infringement of Chieftess's rights as listed in Article A, the procedure MUST be scribed into law.
You may be right. The Procedures may need to be coded to stop people like Strider from doing the things he did. But CT's rights were not violated, except maybe from lack of help by the PD.
Thank you.
Cyc!! Thanks very much!)
only CJ Cyc ruled on the matter, which leaves the question what do we do? I believe that it is clear that me and KCcrusader should rule but does the new CJ have the right to put out a new opinion if he believes one is needed?
