Atlasia v. Devilman88

[bgwah]

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.

[bgwah]

We'll see what we can do since this isn't a particularly good for bullmoose and I.

correction = particular good "time"

That's understandable, as Atlasia is a game and real life takes precedent over it. However, this does not seem to be a terribly complicated case like the GM one, and we've gone through very similar cases in the recent past (Atlasia v. Benconstine I, for example), so I think it may be a little bit easier than some of the other recent court cases we've had.

[bgwah]

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Article_III_of_the_Second_Constitution#Section_2:_Trials

Actually, Franzl has merely shown us the first clause out of seven from Article III section 2 of the Constitution.

Clause 2 says "If a trial does not occur within one month of the accusation for any reason, no trial shall be held and the accused will be declared innocent of the crime," so even using Franzl's logic we have plenty of time left--and even then Devilman88/Josh was not accused in court until this week.

[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.

[bgwah]

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

[bgwah]

EarlAW

[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.

[bgwah]

If the court allows me, I would like to respond to the defense's arguments.

[bgwah]

In response to this part:

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

I believe we should follow the precedence set by Atlasia v. Keystone Phil. During that case, then-Attorney General Hashemite said:

On December 24, 2007; Jessica Walterstein registered as a voter. This is considered voter fraud by S1, C3 of F.L. 15-1, which literally states "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.", which is exactly what Phil did. Whether or not Phil intended at the outset to use the other registration actively or not, it remains a clear breach of the above mentioned clause.

Despite the fact that Phil, like Devilman88 aka Josh22, likely did not have malicious intent and did not intend to use both accounts to vote at the same time, it is still a crime. Phil was found guilty and that precedence must be considered here.

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.

Keystone Phil was not using multiple accounts at the same time. He was "primarily" using the Jessica Walterstein account, before deciding to switch back to the Keystone Phil account. But even then I do not believe this or the name of the case is relevant.

[bgwah]

Even using your logic, the Republic of Atlasia still views someone as an active citizen until they have missed four elections.

Additionally, Keystone Phil also tried to argue that due to the inactivity of his previous account, it was no longer his primary identity. Although the case was later overturned due to an unwarranted search, this claim was not considered as part of the decision leading me to conclude that it did not justify what Phil did.

Justice Ernest,

The information in question wasn't exactly the specific lists. There was a post by the SoFA listing registered voters who would not be allowed to vote in upcoming elections due to inactivity which, as far as I know, would call into question the idea that I had a "primary identity" in Atlasia. I was included in that post and I sent that to my counsel just yesterday. I cannot find that post now.

As for the name of the case, just like the crime was committed in the Mideast Region because that is where the Devilman88 account was registered, the crime was committed with the Devilman88 account. It made sense at the time, but I still do not believe it has any relevance.

[bgwah]

The penalty according the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act is "i. Up to a one year ban from voting in any Atlasian elections. ii. Up to two years ban from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia."

The Attorney General is willing to agree that the maximum punishment does not match the severity of the crime committed and recommends a four month ban from voting and holding office.

[bgwah]

I fail to see what the point of a voting ban is if one does not actually miss any elections.

[bgwah]

The meaning of certain laws isn't always crystal clear. Precedence helps us greatly here.

The possible punishments, however, are crystal clear. There is no question surrounding the wording of the punishment for the crime committed.

I cannot speak for past Attorney Generals, but I do believe some of the punishments handed out in the past have paled in comparison to the crime committed.

A voting ban is not a punishment if the criminal is not actually banned from voting in any elections. My recommendation is for four months--just 1/3 of the maximum (and 1/6 of the maximum for the office holding ban). It is essentially one full election cycle.

[bgwah]

Benconstine had clearly been wronged by Attorney General Xahar, which was taken into consideration by Justice Spade. That is not the case here.

Furthermore, Franzl himself was AG towards the end of the Atlasia v. Benscontine I case, so perhaps his judgment is clouded by a desire to defend his record as Attorney General.