I. FACTS OF THE CASE
On the evening of March 17 at twenty-two minutes to eight, Ninja0428 (hereafter, the defendant) posted in the thread on the 'Act to Repeal the Balanced Budget Requirement' (L10.7.3) asking the delegates if any had more to say on the proposed amendment to the Northern Constitution (
Exhibit 'A'). Approximately two minutes later, he repeated this query on the Lincoln Assembly 'Discord,' resulting in the following complete exchange:
(
Exhibit 'B')
Acting in his capacity as Speaker of the Assembly, the defendant began a vote on the aforementioned bill at nineteen minutes past ten that evening. In accordance with the Statute On Assembly Procedure, voting lasted for forty-eight hours and resulted in the defeat of the legislation.
II. ISSUES
Some of you may disagree with the defendant's actions in this case. You may believe the decision to repeat his request to the Assembly on Discord to be unwise, or inappropriate. These are legitimate questions for the citizens of a free nation to ask; but they are not the subject of this case. The defendant has been charged with a specific offense under federal Law; and he must be judged solely on the merits of that charge and the letter of the Law.
Section 3.i(e) of the Criminal Justice Act defines
Treason by Destruction of Public Records as follows:
The question for the Jury is then,
did the defendant 'delete a thread in which legislation or executive actions were contained?' III. ARGUMENT
The defendant is evidently Not Guilty of Treason as defined by Section 3.i(e) of the Criminal Justice Act, as the Discord channel on which the events of March 17 occurred did not contain 'legislation or executive actions,' was not deleted, and does not constitute a 'thread' as that word may be understood within the context of federal Law.
(a)
The Discord channel did not contain 'legislation or executive actions.'Within the context of Section 3 of the Criminal Justice Act, 'legislation' refers to the actual
text of bills, resolutions, and constitutional amendments considered by the Assembly, and
not to conversation between delegates or even to floor motions brought by the Speaker or other members. This is the accepted understanding of the term as it appears in the Constitution of Atlasia, in the Northern Constitution, and in the Criminal Justice Act: to define any statement by a legislator that concerns the business of the Assembly as 'legislation' is to distort the provisions of the Law to an unreasonable application.
The comments of the defendant and his colleagues may not be considered 'legislation' because they do not contain the text of the bill under consideration. (
Exhibit 'B') They certainly do not contain executive actions, as no action was taken on Discord, but only discussed. Accordingly, the defendants actions do not meet the standard established by Section 3.i(e) of the Criminal Justice Act as constituting Treason by Destruction of Public Records.
(b)
The contents of the Discord channel were not deleted.Even
if the contents of the Discord channel could be understood to constitute 'legislation' (which they reasonably may not), the defendant would still be Not Guilty of the charges presented, because the contents of the Discord channel where the discussion took place were not deleted. I have already presented to the Jury
Exhibit 'B', a screenshot capturing the entirety of the conversation between the defendant, Governor 1184AZ, and Lieutenant Governor Wells on the evening of March 17; the logs from this conversation still exist and may be read on the Lincoln Assembly Discord channel.
It is thus supremely evident that they were not deleted by the defendant, who therefore is Not Guilty of the Destruction of Public Records by virtue of the fact that no public records were destroyed.
(c)
The Discord channel is not a thread.Section 3.i(e) of the Criminal Justice Act clearly defines Treason by Destruction of Public Records as the deletion of a 'thread' containing 'legislation or executive actions.' I have already established, that the Discord channel did not contain of the text of the bill in question, and therefore cannot be understood to contain 'legislation or executive actions.'
Even if, however, by a gross distortion of the law, the defendant's comment were defined as 'legislation,' the defendant would still be Not Guilty because Discord channels may not be understood as 'threads' under federal Law. Rather, 'thread' refers only to threads created and stored on the Atlas Forum and not to external platforms such as Discord.
The Criminal Justice Act defines 'Treason by Destruction of Public Records' as the deletion of a thread containing 'legislation or executive actions.' The defendant did not do this. The Discord channel in question did not 'contain legislation or executive actions.' It was not deleted. Indeed, it is not even a thread. Here I quote the prosecution: "The Speaker, it is true, did not, in a literal sense, delete a thread."
If no thread was deleted, if no public records were destroyed, then on what grounds may the defendant be found guilty of Destruction of Public Records? The prosecution argues that while "he [the defendant] is Not Guilty," the Jury should still convict him because using Discord for government business is allegedly 'subversive.' To do this would be a travesty of Justice, and constitute a clear violation of my client's constitutional right to equal protection under the law.
The Criminal Justice Act does not exist to enforce a vague standard of legislative etiquette and democratic good governance as defined by the Attorney General.
As no public records were destroyed—the full conversation between the defendant and his colleagues exists untouched on the Lincoln Assembly Discord and may be viewed in its entirety in Exhibit B—the defendant may not be reasonably found guilty of the Destruction of Public Records.IV. CONCLUSION
This trial has not been called to debate whether or not Discord is an appropriate platform for conducting government business. That conversation will be held in Congress, where the people and their representatives will reach a fair and informed decision about what the
policy of our republic
should be. The question before this Jury now, is whether the defendant destroyed public records by posting eighteen words on Discord on the evening of March 17. The verdict of the evidence is that he did not; I ask the Jury to review the facts and rule according to the only fair and reasonable interpretation: that the defendant is
Not Guilty of Treason by virtue of never having destroyed public records as that offense is defined by Law.
