Term 1 - Nominations for Public Defender

[Chieftess]

Public Defender - Acts as Chief Attorney for the accused, unless the accused wishes otherwise. Ensures the accused understands his/her rights and the accusation.

 

[ravensfire]

I'll self-nominate, and accept.

Public Defender is one of the least pleasant, and most needed offices in the game. In addition to the usual need to conduct Judicial Reviews, the Public Defender has the difficult task of defending those accused of wrong-doing. It doesn't matter if they are despised by everyone, if I personally dislike them, or even if I feel they are guilty. My job is to represent their interests to the utmost of my abilities.

I've held this position in the past, and demonstrated my abilities. I will continue to be an excellent defender of the Public's trust.

-- Ravensfire

 

[snipelfritz]

I second Ravensfire.

 

[blackheart]

I nominate myself.

 

[mhcarver]

I second the above candidates

 

[Ashburnham]

Debate Question
#1 If forced to defend a citizen during a CC, how do you imagine going about this procedure? How much would the accused contribute to your case?

 

[ravensfire]

Debate Question
#1 If forced to defend a citizen during a CC, how do you imagine going about this procedure? How much would the accused contribute to your case?

First off, I am never forced to defend a citizen. That's my job, my role, my responsibility.

My initial job is to gather all of the evidence about the case - not just the few facts presented in support. I will look for all evidence and factors around the case. I'll then evaluate what's there and confer with my client. If the evidence is overwhelming, I'll suggest a guilty plea and work to find a reasonable sentance for them. If there's a question, or the accused citizen prefers to fight the charges, I'll mount the most vigorous defense possible. In the cases I've defended before, that was the approach I used.

The accused citizen is as much of the case as I am. I'll work with them on a coordinated plan, and encourage them to argue rationally and calmly. It doesn't always work, but I try.

My role is to defend all citizens accused of a violation to the utmost of my abilities. It doesn't matter if I think the charges are right or wrong - all citizens are innocent unless (not until, right Cyc?) proven guilty. Far too many people forget that.

My role is also to encourage the proper use of the Judiciary. We are a last resort. Before any complaint is filed, I believe citizens should work towards a resolution that doesn't involve the court. Far too often, people forget that, and use the sledgehammer when a slight tap is needed. A reminder post, a request sent via PM often can correct the problem. When it doesn't, or if the situation is grevious, that's when a CC should be filed.

Thanks for the question!

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

Debate Question
#1 If forced to defend a citizen during a CC, how do you imagine going about this procedure? How much would the accused contribute to your case?

It is my roll, honor, and duty to defend all citizens of the DG. I will go about it with brevity, proof of evidence, clarity of thought, and power of the judiciary.

All citizens are equal in the eyes of the law. All are innocent until proven guilty. Whoever is accused will have my full devotion to clearing their name.

 

[mhcarver]

Question for the candidates(this has also been posted in the JA nomination thread)
Even though the Public Defender does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures

 

[ravensfire]

Question for the candidates(this has also been posted in the JA nomination thread)
Even though the Public Defender does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures

My key points would be

• Clear opinions that directly answer the question the JR raises whenever possible (sometimes, things have to go back to the People to decide)
• A process that provides speedy resolution to JR's, but actively seeks public involvement
• A willingness to consider all JR's and CC's, but toss out those that are frivolous
• Work to encourage citizens to use CC's as a last resort, not the first salvo
• Above all, respect the rights of each citizen first

I consider the procedures that were used in DG5 to encompass most of that list, excepting only 4th point. The clarity issue is greatly under control of the CJ. Cyc, in particular, was good at pushing on clear opinions, asking for clarifications when needed. Others were not as clear.

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

Question for the candidates(this has also been posted in the JA nomination thread)
Even though the Public Defender does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures

1) Anti beauracratic, anti bogged down judiciary process
2) Fairness before the law for all
3) Cut down frivolous and unnecessary CCs
4) Encourage citizens to work out their differences through mediation first to stop misuse of CCs for personal vendettas
5) Make my answers sound almost like Ravenfire's

 

[Chieftess]

5) Make my answers sound almost like Ravenfire's

Careful... other's tried that same line to some extent.

 

[Provolution]

I support both candidates wholeheartedly

I really hope we will have no CCs or PIs this game, and I think pointing out mistakes strongly and let people see the magnitude of them for themselves is the best Judicial system we can get. If no mediation is possible, other means than the Judicial one should be tried, and we need to instill into peoples minds that the Judicial route is the absolutely last resort.

Ehem, when do the nominations for this prestigious, fair and elevated office actually end?

 

[ravensfire]

Question to Blackheart:

Q: What do you feel is the role of the CC in the Demogame?

A: I think CC's should be that absolute last resort for a citizen to use. We have available to us multiple ways for citizens to communicate with other citizens. Our leaders all create official threads in the Government forum for people to post in. All too often, these threads are underutilized. Indeed, the only official thread that gets more than 2 pages of posts is quite often the Judiciary thread!

CC's should not be accepted without proof that the citizen has tried to contact the accused and rectify the situation, if that's possible, or an especially grevious accusation (playing the save and posting information, for example). Even without mediation, just a simple post in the official thread, or a PM to the person can solve some of the problem. Perhaps a discussion in the citizen thread to handle matters, or a JR to answer a core question.

CC's are not, and should not, be a tool to inflict harm or ill-will towards people. Unfortunately, the acrimony that is often part of the process gives lie to that statement. I hope to see that change, where people are willing to admit a mistake was made, and apologize, while other accept that apology and drop the matter.

If anything, the use of a JR to clarify a situation can often defuse matters to where an "Oops - my bad, I missed it. I'll correct it, and work to prevent it from happening again" is all it takes. During DG IV, I foolishly served as President, and discovered just how difficult it was to handle everything. I made more than a few mistakes, and admitted each one and worked with others to prevent them from happening.

CC's aren't a bad thing, just should be avoided like the plague!

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

Question to Blackheart:

Q: What do you feel is the role of the CC in the Demogame?

CC's are for filing against the misconduct of a person, not for personal vendettas. They are for actual wrongs that have been commited and have solid proof that a wrong has been done, that a rule of the game has been broken.

People who want to file a CC should talk to the person first, to express their grievances and perhaps find a solution to sort out the problem before a CC be made and mud be slung. After all, most CCs are results of simple mistakes without malicious intent.

CCs are a bad thing (I believe), it means that there has been a breakdown in the system of reasoning, and now courts have to decide upon something that could have been smoothed out between citizens.

 

[MOTH]

Question for the candidates:
Do you believe that the accuser in the case of a CC should be able to remain anonymous?

 

[ravensfire]

Question for the candidates:
Do you believe that the accuser in the case of a CC should be able to remain anonymous?

Yes.

As we've seen, CC's can get ugly and cause significant tension in the game between various people. There are a variety of reasons that a person would wish to remain anonymous, and I will support all of them.

Now, that won't stop me, as a public defender, from speculating as to the reasons if I feel a CC to be directed at the person and/or a politically-motivated attack against someone. I think it's a cheapshot to take such an action, but I will still defend the right of a citizen to file a CC, any CC, for any reason, anonymously.

An anonymous CC is a form of protection of each citizen against tyranny. Anonymous speech can be the most powerful because of the freedom to make statements without reprisal. A CC by an anonymous citizen thus can take on any citizen, including the most powerful, without fear of retribution.

That's a needed part of this game given that several of our citizen are, in fact, moderators. Citizens need to feel free to challenge their actions, as leaders (NOT as moderators) and citizens when needed. This can be difficult given the fear of moderator actions in reprisal.

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

Question for the candidates:
Do you believe that the accuser in the case of a CC should be able to remain anonymous?

Yes I do. Anonoymous to the public. But I think the accuser should take responsibility and have a talk with the accused before filing a CC, or reveal him/herself to the accused to discuss the legal matter during the CC, and this should be kept behind closed doors. But if the accuser does not wish to do neither, it is their right.

 

[Black_Hole]

Yes I do. Anonoymous to the public. But I think the accuser should take responsibility and have a talk with the accused before filing a CC, or reveal him/herself to the accused to discuss the legal matter during the CC, and this should be kept behind closed doors. But if the accuser does not wish to do neither, it is their right.

in a fierce CC the accused could just name the accuser and then get pressure taken off them... bad idea

 

[ravensfire]

Yes I do. Anonoymous to the public. But I think the accuser should take responsibility and have a talk with the accused before filing a CC, or reveal him/herself to the accused to discuss the legal matter during the CC, and this should be kept behind closed doors. But if the accuser does not wish to do neither, it is their right.

That would break one of the reasons for the anonymous filing though - to remain unknown to the accused and prevent any reprisals.

It's a bit unfair, and rough for the accused to deal with this. Having been through it as the PD on a rather unpleasant CC, it's not fun to see your client attacked, and not know who did it, or why. You can guess, and speculate, but that's not exactly fair to the people you suspect. After all, you could very well be wrong.

During that process, my client railed against a couple of people privately, and suspected a few, as did I. The unknown was difficult to deal with - you had to speculate at the reasons for some of the actions, but didn't know if you were right or wrong. It made parts of the case more challenging, and other parts simpler. Of all the cases I've seen, it was probably the one I most wanted to know who did it, and probably the best one to remain anonymous.

-- Ravensfire