Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
You want to hear my side?
I didn't do it. That is my defense.
Are you sure? You have until you say: "The Defense closes." Then you're done.
The defense rests.
Er, Closes.
From this point, nothing can be said in defense of Alchandria, anything that is will not be taken into account by the Board.
Okay. What does the prosecution have to say?
Would I be held in contempt if I said the prosecution can go f*ck itself?
Yes.
Noted.
I really, really resent this unfair persecution of Alchandria without a shred of evidence to back it up. And why the Frick would he send a puppet to vote for him 10 minutes before he won when he had a big lead as it was?
I'm firmly behind Alchandria on this one. The campaign against him is built solely upon mindless presumptions and scaremongering.
And maybe conspiracy.
And for God's sake, there can't be a damn trial if there hasn't been an investigation yet. You usually go to court with evidence to present.
This won't be considered. By the Board.
You might as well be talking to a brick wall, as I think the Intelligence Quotient on the side of the prosecution is collectively low.
It's the same thing. Both could present the evidence they found in their own investigation. He chose not to. TTA is still looking. Someone broke the law, and he is the most likely offender. So he was the one that was legally charged following government procedure by the Attorney General.
The prosecution will respond after he finishes a Kentucky fried chicken meal.
The Board does recognize the defense's contempt-filled comments.
Question pev.
At what time did you send out the recruitment and may I have details on whom they were directed too and the amount you sent.
And failing miserably, because there is NO DAMNED EVIDENCE, BECAUSE THERE WASN'T A CRIME.
You may charge him with contempt now.
The defense has a lot of contempt. A LOT of contempt. But also faith that the board won't punish him for a crime he didn't commit.
No, we intend to punish you for the crime you just committed.
Guys, let's get a little more evidence. But personally, I also believe a crime was committed.
You can decide after we present our argument.
I'm only awaiting Pev for my investigation to continue.
Please do. I like trials.
The prosecution at least has evidence of contempt, so...I'm going to be voting you guilty of something. Question is, are you guilty on both counts? That remains to be seen.
I'm not aware of a law criminalising 'contempt of court', and even if there was it would probably contradict the POLICY Act.
Personally, I don't blame him. He doesn't deserve to be harassed like this by the government he's served so diligently.
Post self-deleted by The Time Alliance.
Pev. Back to it.
Can I have the information on the Recruitment Telegrams.
That doesn't change that he's currently harassing it back.
*flips the bird to everyone with both hands*
I'm on tablet at the moment, and I can't find the recruitment TG through my sents. But I'll look through them on my PC tomorrow.
*facepalms*
Not the least bit of respect. Wow. Real mature.
Do you know when you sent them (be as precise as possible) and how many were sent?
Hey, Shut the f*ck up.
Time, you are supposed to act, as Attorney-General, based on the law. That is literally your job. But there is nothing in the law about 'contempt of court'. Free speech is guaranteed by the POLICY Act.
And he has every right to.
Excuse me!? I'm not the one using profane language here!
500, a few hours ago.
Alch, calm down. You're crossing the line now. Einsiev is just an observer.
I know.
Guys he does have Freedom of Speech.
No matter how much we dislike it....he has it. He can't be charged for being contempt in court.
Freedom of speech does not indicate a freedom from the consequences of said speech. (Besides, he's probably breaking NS rules by this point; we have to do something.)
Alchandria is innocent until proven guilty.
Sorry that I am a bit indignant that I am being charged for a crime that I wasn't even aware happened.
We regionally don't have consequences of said speech... NS does though.
Do you remember about how many hours ago?
In Libertatem law, there are no legal consequences.
From the Constitution:
Article VII
Rights
Section I
Subsection I
The government shall make no law enforcing an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Again, I'm not sure but will find out tomorrow.
So...I could insult him right back and get away with it?
Lets act at least somewhat mature.
Go for it.
....Yes though I wish you wouldn't.
Okay then.......the time between Your telegrams and his founding are detrimental.
See, that's just it. The government does not have the authority, by these words, to prevent someone from speaking, nor take action as a result of the speech itself. However, considering speech can be used as evidence in a regional trial, surely there would be a crime related to using speech incorrectly, for instance shouting "Mods!" in a crowded RMB?
Correct. Everyone stop getting so hostile. Let's just do this, get done, and carry on.
Agreed.
Yep.
CI remember you're supposed to remain objective.
Or we could agree I didn't do it.
We need a trial first.
I will, but as long as you don't force me to be Objectivist.
Present some evidence. Then come back and have a real trial.
That is precisely what the prosecution intends to do. Give them time.
I'm gonna go to sleep now. Nighty night, Libertatem.
*from the depths of the regional archives, the region itself bellows, "Good night, Pevvania", and everyone was creeped out forever. The end*
Okay our investigation won't be complete until I get the telegram data from Pev. Here's what we have so far.
The nation of Urerus relocated from The East Pacific to Libertatem approximately 115 minutes of this typing.As soon as he joined the region he voted for Alchandria. This happened 5 minutes after his founding. Since then he has had no new activity and Alchandria wasn't on during this time. Again this is not our final evidence as I need to hear the telegram datan
I expected that to be more like the Mark Levin intro.
Also, G'night Mr. President.
I assume I'm able to comment on someone going to bed, since it doesn't pertain to the trial.
Regardless, I'll shut up now.
What about the part where the vote quickly switched in favor of Alchandria, depsite Einsiev having a clear early lead?
Then again, that might be a result of actual voting rather than any fraud.
Never.
Someone wanna fill me in here? What happening with Alchandria? He couldn't use puppets anyway.. FRAUD.
Are we going to ignore the part where they changed their currency, animal, and flag? Why would a puppet do that?
That's just it. If he did use puppets, then he violated the FRAUD Act.
I did notice that. However I don't have any reason to believe that wasn't just a move played by the RLP. I have not yet any thing saying that is actionable. If evidence us discovered I'll bring it up again.
Hey. You comment much more, I'll replace you on the jury. That was definitely subjective. Alchandria, remember, you closed. Anything you said after that, except your contempt (which is a minor offense), will not be considered by the jury.
Okay, I see. I just found that suspicious, that's all.
I'll stop helping the prosecution now.
He was at this moment only on for 5 minutes.
But wouldn't that judgment call on your part be subjective? *Inception theme plays*
I voted on and contributed to the advent of FRAUD. Hell, The reason fraud was created was because you guys thought I was committing voter fraud last election cycle.
But technically the puppets don't hold a vote anyway because there not citizens right? I'm going to read FRAUD again.
We shouldn't freak out about every vote that comes along that appears illegitimate..
The Investigation takes this into account. He has been once before accused of Fraud.
I can say, as a senior member, there was no choreographed move.
Sub-ject-ive.
Yea, maybe it's just me. But i see nothing to prosecute Alchandria over.
Section II, Subsection II.
That wasn't on the trial. That was commenting on TTA's post about the RLP switching together. It had nothing to do with the trial. How bout stepping up off me fo you get spanked. Sorry, sorry, went ghetto for a second.
Let put Obama on a voter fraud trial next! :)
It says they don't have rights to do so. If they attempt to exercise them, that would be criminal, would it not?
Besides, Section III, Subsection IV. Right now, we're trying to figure out whether Alchandria is violating that. Now, we're both on the jury, so let's listen in on what the prosecution has to say.
It doesn't. This isn't about the RLP.
Section 3 Subsection II
Only Citizens of Libertatem may vote in any office or legislative election or referendum
Thought you were from Intuckey not Fort Wayne ;)
OOOOOOOOOOOH GET STOMPED ON.
Sorry.
Which.. proves my point. The potential puppet isn't a citizen. Therefore, his vote doesn't count.
He still can be investigated for voter fraud.
Can we just throw this thing at the jury and get on with it.
The proper term is Kentuckiana, sir. And I take offense to that term. Damned if I get associated with those gang members. Louisville is not a safe city.
I need telegram data from Pev.
For those of you who don't live here. The proper way to say Louisville is lu-a-vall. Many out-of-towners come here talking bout lou-ie-ville.
I'm not going to refute that point. But if your going to press charges hopefully he can at least know what those charges are.
Inb4 someones asks if they are being detained.
Go eat a bag of sh*t.
Noted by the jury.
He is currently being investigated. Not charged.
And if we were to press charges it would be Violation of the Fraud Act.
I'm honestly pleading you to stop.
But I thought that the jury wasn't considering anything I had to say anymore.
gotcha, but then why is there a trial?
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.