Atlasia v. Devilman88

[Peter]

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.

[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

[Peter]

In Atlasia v. Keystone Phil, the case that you believed offered clear precedence for this case, Keystone Phil was sentenced to a 1 week voting ban and 6 month ban from holding office.

The main thrust of punishment for Keystone Phil was to deny him the office of President - it didn't matter that he couldn't vote, what was key was the denial of office.

Here, what will actually punish your client is to deny him his vote, therefore a lengthier voting ban is in order.