Laki v. Young Texan

[reagente]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

Can you proof this is fake?

Yes, we will let any Justice (or designated representative of the Court) into the SEXIT chat to show that the screenshot has been edited.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

Can you proof this is fake?

Yes, we will let any Justice (or designated representative of the Court) into the SEXIT chat to show that the screenshot has been edited.

No i'm specifically asking for this one



which was not made in SEXIT.

[reagente]

No i'm specifically asking for this one

which was not made in SEXIT.

Where was the post made? I am in a lot of chats, so I don't know where to begin to look to verify if that is true or not.

Also, assuming this screenshot is accurate, It appears that you have posted privileged attorney discussion material.

[reagente]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

I move to dismiss this case for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant parties.

Likewise, in addition to renewing request for sanctions in response to the special prosecutor's introduction of tampered evidence, I move that additional sanctions be placed against the special prosecutor, as the special prosecutor admitted to the indictment of persons for purpose of jury tampering:



To that end, I move that indictments not supported by probable cause be dismissed with prejudice

[LAKISYLVANIA]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

I move to dismiss this case for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant parties.

Likewise, in addition to renewing request for sanctions in response to the special prosecutor's introduction of tampered evidence, I move that additional sanctions be placed against the special prosecutor, as the special prosecutor admitted to the indictment of persons for purpose of jury tampering:



To that end, I move that indictments not supported by probable cause be dismissed with prejudice

I thought you didn't recognise the juridisiction of the court.

[reagente]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

I move to dismiss this case for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant parties.

Likewise, in addition to renewing request for sanctions in response to the special prosecutor's introduction of tampered evidence, I move that additional sanctions be placed against the special prosecutor, as the special prosecutor admitted to the indictment of persons for purpose of jury tampering:



To that end, I move that indictments not supported by probable cause be dismissed with prejudice

I thought you didn't recognise the juridisiction of the court.

Correct. The independent South will not enforce the judgement. The court should dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.

However, in the event that my clients ever wish to travel to Atlasia in the future, they do not want to be subjected to arrest due to an indictment brought about by kangroo-court-esque prosecutorial misconduct. Furthermore, this court still very much has jurisdiction over you.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Amicus Brief :

Foreigners are clearly allowed to testify and make their case in a court according to precedent so Laki’s point here makes no sense .

It does not change the fact he clearly attempted to tamper with the jury as seen in those screenshots and due to that abused his power as prosecutor . These charges should be dropped immediately given the motivations the prosecutor in this case admits too

[LAKISYLVANIA]

It is the opinion of this court that none of the prospective charges to be filed here took place within any physical boundary in Atlasia; the alleged conduct took place entirely in online chatrooms and the cosntituent forum with no physical present required for any of the involved actions. Thus there is no mandatory constitutional venue in this case.

Due to the direct involvement of the governments of the other two regions, the Supreme Court has decided that Lincoln is the appropriate venue for proceedings and has appointed me to preside.

Grand Jury proceedings will begin immediately. I will post a separate thread for those proceedings to begin. The defense counsel is hereby ordered to refrain from posting in that thread directly; I also ask that all others aside from the justices of the Supreme Court, the selected grand jurors, and those authorized by the prosecution refrain from posting in that thread. To begin, I ask that the prosecution respond to that thread listing all the individuals it wishes to charge and each crime it seeks to charge each individual. Following this, the court will proceed to selection of the grand jury.

The prosecution has introduced new evidence of acts which occurred within the physical boundary of the South, namely resolutions passed by the Southern legislature, and executive orders issued by the President of the South. This evidence shows a clear territorial nexus to the Southern region and therefore I request that venue be immediately transferred from Lincoln to the South.

Furthermore, I request that the court hold Laki in criminal contempt and move that the current indictments be quashed due to the posting of fabricated evidence. I never expected the prosecution to resort to such illegal and immoral tactics, but that is nevertheless what has happened.

Laki in the Grand Jury thread posted the following evidence:

Something that was actually seriously being discussed in the senate as part of the Regional Rights Amendment, giving an amendment proposal was to make the ownership of nuclear weapons a regional right, something that would've fitted these plans perfectly.



Would you trust nuclear weapons being a regional right when you have a Southern President who discusses plans about supposedly the purchase/annexation of Iceland and the Faroe Islands after Greenland, but also specifically about having the oil and the nukes to be able to destroy the world.

Reproduced here:


This screenshot is edited. The actual screenshot is as follows:



I can provide a Justice of the Court access to the SEXIT chat to provide proof of this. Shame on the prosecution.

I move to dismiss this case for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant parties.

Likewise, in addition to renewing request for sanctions in response to the special prosecutor's introduction of tampered evidence, I move that additional sanctions be placed against the special prosecutor, as the special prosecutor admitted to the indictment of persons for purpose of jury tampering:



To that end, I move that indictments not supported by probable cause be dismissed with prejudice

I accuse the defendants counsel for fabricating "fabricated evidence" and thus contempt of court and obstruction of justice.



Here is proof of that.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

More importantly

Lawyer Reagente knew how to fabricate the evidence and told the prosecutor exactly how to do it.

[reagente]

Is your argument that you posted evidence to a grand jury not substantiated by a witness, or is it that you got access to a private chat where rival attorney's were discussing the case and you intentionally used what you would have known to be privileged information, or is it both?

And this somehow makes the defendants guilty? the side that didn't introduce the evidence?

[reagente]

Counsel for the defendants acknowledges the receipt of indictments, and will file a number of pre-trial motions in the coming days.

[reagente]

Counsel for the defendants acknowledges the receipt of indictments, and will file a number of pre-trial motions in the coming days.

I haven't forgotten about this, but work has been unusually hectic, so I haven't been able to work on this as much as I'd like. I hope to have the first motion ready at the end of the week.

Edit: I will file my first of what I anticipate to be five pre-trial motions by the 21st of July,  but if the court requires an earlier time table, I will try to accommodate that

=====

This will be the first of five motions I intend to file (though some motions may have brief arguments-in-alternative depending on how they are resolved):

Motion 1: Confrontation Clause and SEXIT 2.0 chat

Article I, Section 10 of the Atlasian Constitution reads as follows:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of their peers in the Region wherein the crime shall have been committed, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against them, to have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in their favor, and to have the assistance of counsel in their defense.

As this is a criminal trial, the accused here have the constitutional right "to be confronted with the witnesses against them." The Right to Confrontation (which is a protection that dates as far back as the English Common Law and Roman Law) guarantees that an accused person cannot be convicted and found guilty based on written evidence without having the opportunity to face their accuser and test their truthfulness before the bench or a jury.

It is simple enough to operationalize the Right of Confrontation when it comes to testimonial evidence provided at trial. If a witness testifies on behalf of the government, the Right to Confrontation is preserved simply by allowing the defense to subsequently cross-examine that witness.

The Right to Confrontation applies just as much when it comes to non-verbal evidence. Any non-verbal / written evidence that purports to establish a fact is just as accusatory as a witness before the stand. Thus, written evidence must be defended and authenticated by the person who obtained it for the prosecution, lest the Right to Confrontation have no practical effect (since it allow for accusations to be laundered through the prosecutor and let an accuser avoid being put under oath and directly questioned by the accused).

The prosecution has produced a witness that will purport to authenticate statements allegedly made in the "SEXIT" chat (LouisvilleThunder). Additionally the prosecution has introduced into evidence Southern legislation, official orders of Southern officials, and statements made in office threads. Such evidence, made in the South before a public forum can be readily authenticated by anyone who has direct access to those statements (including the prosecutor himself), so there are no Right to Confrontation challenges concerns with those pieces of evidence. The accused will have the opportunity to cross-examine should this case proceed to trial. However, with regard to evidence allegedly from the "SEXIT 2" chat, the same cannot be said.

Several months after this trial has begun, the prosecution has still not provided the defense with the witness who produced the alleged excerpts from the "SEXIT 2." chat, much less confirm that this individual will subject themselves to cross-examination. The special prosecutor has suggested that they are not a first-hand witness to the alleged contents of "SEXIT 2", so some other person presumably is the source. The prosecution directly cites "SEXIT 2" to accuse Young Texan, Mr. Reactionary, reagente, and DeadPrez of either engaging in rebellion or aiding rebellion, so the Right to Confrontation is applicable here.

That accuser is constitutionally prohibited from hiding behind the prosecutor to avoid being cross-examined.

To that end, I move for the following:

1. That Special Prosecutor Laki immediately divulge who the authenticating source of the "SEXIT 2.0" evidence is, and that the actual source confirms that they will subject themselves to cross-examination.
2. Should either of the requests in item #1 fail to be met, that any evidence from "SEXIT 2.0" be barred from evidence and any charges that depend upon such evidence be summarily dismissed. 

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Thank you, counsel, for your detailed motion. While your argument is eloquently crafted, it is built on a flawed premise.

You argue that the Right to Confrontation requires an individual witness to come forth and authenticate the evidence from the SEXIT 2.0 chat, as if the chat itself was an accuser hiding behind the prosecution. However, this is a misinterpretation of the principle.

The nature of the SEXIT 2.0 evidence does not necessitate an individual witness for authentication, because the chat records are not testimonial evidence offered by an individual accuser. They are documentary evidence that stands on its own, much like security footage, bank records, or written contracts. Such evidence can be authenticated without necessarily requiring a particular witness to testify to its veracity, assuming it fulfills other evidentiary requirements.

Furthermore, it's important to note the Right to Confrontation is not an absolute right. The courts have consistently allowed exceptions to the rule where necessary, such as in cases involving child abuse victims or where a witness is unavailable but has given prior testimony under oath.

Now, addressing your second point, I must raise a serious concern. I noticed that the original request made on July 3rd was edited today, on July 22nd. This raises questions about the integrity of this motion and your motivations for such a modification.

In light of this, I ask the court to take into account the late alterations made to this motion, which may well be an attempt to catch the prosecution off guard or otherwise mislead the court. In the spirit of fairness, it is crucial that any changes to arguments or requests be made transparently and promptly disclosed to all parties.

To conclude, I respectfully request that the court denies this motion, on the grounds that it is based on a misinterpretation of the Right to Confrontation, and that the late editing of the original request raises concerns about the integrity and motivations behind this motion.

[reagente]

Thank you, counsel, for your detailed motion. While your argument is eloquently crafted, it is built on a flawed premise.

You argue that the Right to Confrontation requires an individual witness to come forth and authenticate the evidence from the SEXIT 2.0 chat, as if the chat itself was an accuser hiding behind the prosecution. However, this is a misinterpretation of the principle.

The nature of the SEXIT 2.0 evidence does not necessitate an individual witness for authentication, because the chat records are not testimonial evidence offered by an individual accuser. They are documentary evidence that stands on its own, much like security footage, bank records, or written contracts. Such evidence can be authenticated without necessarily requiring a particular witness to testify to its veracity, assuming it fulfills other evidentiary requirements.

Furthermore, it's important to note the Right to Confrontation is not an absolute right. The courts have consistently allowed exceptions to the rule where necessary, such as in cases involving child abuse victims or where a witness is unavailable but has given prior testimony under oath.

Now, addressing your second point, I must raise a serious concern. I noticed that the original request made on July 3rd was edited today, on July 22nd. This raises questions about the integrity of this motion and your motivations for such a modification.

In light of this, I ask the court to take into account the late alterations made to this motion, which may well be an attempt to catch the prosecution off guard or otherwise mislead the court. In the spirit of fairness, it is crucial that any changes to arguments or requests be made transparently and promptly disclosed to all parties.

To conclude, I respectfully request that the court denies this motion, on the grounds that it is based on a misinterpretation of the Right to Confrontation, and that the late editing of the original request raises concerns about the integrity and motivations behind this motion.

The security footage, bank records, and Written contracts are all originals in the hypothetical you described. What you posted cannot be described as an original in any capacity. It is a transcript, not even a screen shot of original discord formatting (which I am not even sure would suffice considering you introduced into evidence a fabricated discord screenshot). The Right to Confrontation requires that the person who produces a copy or transcript testify to its veracity. Otherwise a biased person could always edit or re-arrange text. Thus, the Right to Confrontation still applies for SEXIT 2.0, and the only way to authenticate here is by the transcriber swearing under oath that the transcript is a fair and accurate copy of what he observed. If this cannot be done, the evidence must be suppressed.

I think that FRE 901 puts it well when it says: "to satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is". Failure to do so violates the constitutional right to confrontation.

You are correct that the Right to Confrontation is not an absolute right - but the exceptions you list are baffling. This case clearly does not involve child abuse - and when exactly did the defendants have the right to cross-examine the (possibly) unavailable witness. We still don't even know who the witness is!

Regarding editing of the post. I did not delete or change any content that was already posted, I only made additions, that were indicated as such. I made an initial announcement of intention to file a motion, subsequently added an addendum that my original intention of a filing date was optimistic and created a new self imposed deadline of July 21st (with the note that if the court wanted to impose a different deadline I was happy to comply to the best of my ability), and then I fulfilled the self-imposed deadline last night as I said I would. Everything below the line is what I added late on July 21st. There was no motion made before then, and that post was still the most recent post until you made a reply today (so its not like this edit was "hidden" in any sort of way). I fail to see how this creates any prejudice.

If it pleases the court, I am happy to inaugurate a rule that says you cannot edit posts beyond a certain time from posting (as no such rule currently exists), but it would hardly be a proper response to trample the bill of rights simply because the defendants exercised their right to file motions in support of their case.

[Sestak]

Due to fairly limited access to this site through July and August, I am handing this case over to Justice Ilikeverin.

[reagente]

This is the second motion I intend to file. This concerns as a simple matter of statutory construction, the inapplicability of the Criminal Justice Act of 2016 to two of the defendants. There will be another motion forthcoming regarding the constitutionality of some of the provisions of the aforementioned act, but I thought I would start with this, as it is the simpler of the two motions:

Motion 2: Judgement as Matter of Law - Criminal Justice Act of 2016

Defendants DeadPrez and Sunrise have been indicted under Section 3, clause (g) of the 2016 Criminal Justice Act, which reads:

(g) Refutation of Federal Supremacy in Law. This shall be defined as the denial – whether by word, by deed, or by omission – by any serving officeholder in the Republic of Atlasia or any of its constituent Regions of the supremacy of federal law, or of the decision by any person to serve in a Regional government that denies that it is subject to federal law.

As a matter of law, Defendants DeadPrez and Sunrise cannot be charged, because at the time, neither defendant was an office holder. Section 3, clause (g) as written only applies to officeholders, not ordinary citizens, so the indictments against Deadprez and Sunrise must be quashed.

Then Southern President Young Texan lacked the authority to allegedly appoint DeadPrez and Sunrise. Neither were validly appointed, and thus cannot be said to be office holders.

Article III, Section 7 of the Southern Constitution provides:

7. The President shall have the power to carry out all acts in association with the enforcement of the laws passed under this Constitution; to fill vacancies in the House; to command the regional militia in times of war; to appoint, with the consent of the House of Burgesses, the heads of any executive departments which may be established by law; to issue pardons and reprieves for crimes committed under the laws of this Region, which shall be permanent upon their issuance, though he shall have no power to pardon himself; to appoint, in accordance with Article V of the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia, the Associate Justice for this Region; and to approve, or veto, all acts passed by the House of Burgesses.

Under the Southern Constitution, Presidential appointments must be made “with the consent of the House of Burgesses.” In the case of DeadPrez, there was no consultation with the House of Burgesses. President Young Texan’s alleged appointment was not designated as an interim appointment, nor was a vote ever scheduled (and indeed there still has not been a vote months later). DeadPrez cannot be considered validly appointed to Secretary of State, and thus was not an officeholder, nor was he “serving” in any valid capacity during the events described in the indictment.

The evidence presented against DeadPrez thus represents a statement of a private citizen - not a governmental statement as the prosecution implicitly claims - so Section 3, clause (g) of the 2016 Criminal Justice Act does not apply, and the indictment on that basis should be thrown out.

The case for throwing out the indictment against Sunrise is even stronger. Much like with DeadPrez, there was no consultation with the House of Burgesses before the purported appointment (and there still has been none). Additionally, Sunrise allegedly occupied a position which has never been established by Southern law.

Article III, Section 7 of the Southern Constitution provides that the appointment power extends only to “the heads of any executive departments which may be established by law”. There was never any law creating a “Southern Security Cabinet”, nor the position of “General” to which Sunrise was appointed, so Sunrise cannot be considered validly appointed and thus was not an officeholder during the time of the events described in the indictment. Thus, under Section 3, clause (g) of the 2016 Criminal Justice Act cannot apply to Sunrise, and the indictment against him on that basis should be thrown out.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

What needs to be done here moving on?

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

?