Atlasia v. Devilman88

[minionofmidas]

The obvious precedent is Atlasia vs Keystone Phil, is it not? There was an additional issue in that one with the way evidence was obtained, which doesn't pertain here, but the facts of the case are essentially identical (in that no harm was done but the same law was broken in the same way. Not in motivation, obviously.)

[Franzl]

The defense believes that Clause 2 is to be interpreted as a general guideline, and that "one month" be interpreted as an absolute maximum.

The fact that the previous Attorney General chose not to press charges and that these charges were only filed when a new person took over the Department of Justice was unfair towards my client.

The defense wonders if the previous Attorney General ever had any intent to accuse my client of voter fraud. This has left my client in an unjustifiable feeling of insecurity and mental torment, not knowing what to expect in regards to these accusations.

[bgwah]

The defense believes that Clause 2 is to be interpreted as a general guideline, and that "one month" be interpreted as an absolute maximum.

The fact that the previous Attorney General chose not to press charges and that these charges were only filed when a new person took over the Department of Justice was unfair towards my client.

The defense wonders if the previous Attorney General ever had any intent to accuse my client of voter fraud. This has left my client in an unjustifiable feeling of insecurity and mental torment, not knowing what to expect in regards to these accusations.

I do not believe the previous Attorney General exercised the duties of his office in any way.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The procedure from previous cases has been this:

1. AG starts the Court thread
2. AG serves notice on the defendant by means of a PM which is cced to Court personnel. At this point the AG should explicitly list the rights of the defendant, especially to counsel.
3. Court assigns Counsel if requested
4. Court directs defendant to enter plea
5. Court selects jury if necessary
6. AG presents prosecution case
7. Defense presents case.
8. Jury votes.
9. Sentencing if necessary.
10. Appeals procedures outlined by the Court

I would strongly urge all Atlasians not to discuss the details of this case in this thread - also by openly discussing facts, you compromise your ability to serve on a jury if called.

Well honestly, that wouldn't happen if the justices actually got the court case started in a reasonable time.

[Franzl]

Your honor, Justice opebo, I am still waiting on a ruling on my motion for dismissal.

[opebo]

The motion for dismissal is denied, please continue.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Wait, so this will be a jury trial?  If so, did the crime occur with Josh in the DS or Devilman in the Mideast?

[Devilman88]

I plea not guilty.

[opebo]

So we need a jury.  I do not see any information provided here by either party as to where this allegedly took place, so that would be a necessary.  Whoever is the relevant public official in that place must provide a list of eligable jurors.

[Purple State]

So we need a jury.  I do not see any information provided here by either party as to where this allegedly took place, so that would be a necessary.  Whoever is the relevant public official in that place must provide a list of eligable jurors.

Does public official imply Governor? Or CJO (if it occurred in the Mideast)? Because as of now the Mideast has placed the CJO on a temporary appointment basis.

[opebo]

So we need a jury.  I do not see any information provided here by either party as to where this allegedly took place, so that would be a necessary.  Whoever is the relevant public official in that place must provide a list of eligable jurors.

Does public official imply Governor? Or CJO (if it occurred in the Mideast)? Because as of now the Mideast has placed the CJO on a temporary appointment basis.

I would prefer that you not use acronyms in this court.  The allegation is that this occurred in the Mideast.

[Purple State]

So we need a jury.  I do not see any information provided here by either party as to where this allegedly took place, so that would be a necessary.  Whoever is the relevant public official in that place must provide a list of eligable jurors.

Does public official imply Governor? Or CJO (if it occurred in the Mideast)? Because as of now the Mideast has placed the CJO on a temporary appointment basis.

I would prefer that you not use acronyms in this court.  The allegation is that this occurred in the Mideast.

My apologies your Honor. CJO is the Chief Judicial Officer of the Mideast. If the alleged crime occurred in the Mideast, who would be charged with supplying the eligible Jurist list? Would it be Governor Inks? Or the currently vacant Chief Judicial Officer?

[opebo]

So we need a jury.  I do not see any information provided here by either party as to where this allegedly took place, so that would be a necessary.  Whoever is the relevant public official in that place must provide a list of eligable jurors.

Does public official imply Governor? Or CJO (if it occurred in the Mideast)? Because as of now the Mideast has placed the CJO on a temporary appointment basis.

I would prefer that you not use acronyms in this court.  The allegation is that this occurred in the Mideast.

My apologies your Honor. CJO is the Chief Judicial Officer of the Mideast. If the alleged crime occurred in the Mideast, who would be charged with supplying the eligible Jurist list? Would it be Governor Inks? Or the currently vacant Chief Judicial Officer?

Well, firstly let us ask the defendant, do you wish a jury trial or do you prefer to waive that right?

[bgwah]

I believe the Secretary of Forum Affairs has compiled the list in the past.

[opebo]

I believe the Secretary of Forum Affairs has compiled the list in the past.

Thank you for the helpful contribution.  Who is the personage who holds that office at present?

[bgwah]

EarlAW

[Hatman 🍁]

This is a list of Mideast citizens:

afleitch - WI
anvikshiki - IL
a Person - IL
badger - OH
benconstine - VA
Boris - IL
Catmusic - IN
cindywho2212 - KY
Einzige - IL
filliatre - OH
franzl - IL
Hannibal - MD
Inks.LWC - MI
jamespol - MO
JOHN91043353 - WI
KyleGordon2016 - WV
Mint - VA
officepark - VA
opebo - MO
Peter - IN
Purple State - VA
Realpolitik - WV
The Mikado - DC
tmthforu94 - IN

I believe you want the list trimmed a bit for activity reasons and the whatnot, but I forget the restrictions.

[Peter]

The terms of both the federal and Mideast Jury Selection Statutes do not allow for those with previous convictions to serve on the jury, so benconstine is not eligible.

Justice Ernest's rulings on the applicability of Mideast law in this matter, and subsequent jury selection criteria can be found here

[Hatman 🍁]

Here is a list Mideasterners who voted in at least one of the last two elections (Presidential and special)

afleitch - WI

a Person - IL
badger - OH
benconstine - VA
Boris - IL
Catmusic - IN
cindywho2212 - KY
Einzige - IL
filliatre - OH
franzl - IL
Hannibal - MD
Inks.LWC - MI
JOHN91043353 - WI
KyleGordon2016 - WV
Mint - VA
officepark - VA
opebo - MO
Peter - IN
Purple State - VA
tmthforu94 - IN

[Devilman88]

I waive my right to a jury trial.

[opebo]

I waive my right to a jury trial.

Very well. 

Mr. Prosecutor, please continue.

[bgwah]

I posted my case at the beginning for some strange reason. I will repost it here for everyone's convenience:

Devilman88 has recently admitted to being Josh22 and as a result is being charged with violating the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act.

According to Section 3, Clause 1 of the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act, "Voter fraud, defined as the creation of identities other than ones primary identity in Atlasia and subsequently entering this identity into the tally of registered voters" is a crime against Atlasia. Because Devilman88 was registered in the Mideast Region, the Attorney General believes the crime was committed there due to the precedence set by Atlasia v. Benconstine I.

Additionally, information that may be relevant to the case: Josh last voted in the August 2008 election. He missed the following elections in October, December, February and April and was then officially deregistered following the April 2009 Senate Election.  Dan registered on March 29th, 2009. Thus the two accounts were both registered voters for approximately several weeks from March 29th, 2009 to the end of the April 2009 Senate Election--approximately Monday, April 19th. Furthermore, Josh/Devilman88 himself was regularly updating the Registered Voter Roll on the Wiki, and according to the page history, did not remove Josh until April 22nd, 2009--several weeks after the Devilman88 account was registered.

[opebo]

Counsel for the defense please post.

[Franzl]

Your honor,

The defense recognizes that devilman88 is indeed Josh22, as he himself has admitted. The defense, however, does not believe that voter fraud was committed. It is important in this context to define what constitutes a "primary identity" in Atlasia.

As the prosecution presents, Josh22 last voted in the August 2008 election, after which he missed 4 consecutive elections before being automatically removed from the voter roll. The prosecution correctly establishes that both Josh22 and devilman88 were simultaneously registered for a few weeks. Devilman88 registered on March 29, 2009, more than 7 months after Josh22 had last used his voting rights.

As opposed to the circumstances surrounding Atlasia v. Benconstine I, my client never used, nor had the intention to use both accounts simultaneously in Atlasia. Benconstine's second account, The Populist, went so far as to actually vote in an election that Benconstine also voted in. In that case, one can correctly establish that Benconstine did indeed commit voter fraud because The Populist was clearly not Benconstine's primary identity in Atlasia.

Devilman88 became active in Atlasia at a point where Josh22 no longer had any connection to Atlasia. It would be unfair to convict my client of voter fraud when "devilman88" was de facto my client's primary identity by that point.

The defense also wishes to point out that the prosecution is accusing Devilman88 of voter fraud, not Josh22. This should also strengthen my argument that Devilman88 is widely seen as my client's primary identity. If the prosecution were correctly interpreting the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act, then it would have to have launched a case against Josh22 for voter fraud if it had believed that Josh22 was my client's primary identity. It appears illogical to me to accuse Devilman88 of being anyone besides Devilman88's primary identity.

As previously stated, voter fraud was not committed due to my client's assumption of Devilman88 as his primary Atlasian identity. No malicious intent existed, and never did my client attempt to influence any election by voting with any account other than his own primary identity, Devilman 88.

[opebo]

Thank you gentlemen, there will be a recess while the court considers.