People of the Republic of Atlasia vs. LouisvilleThunder (version 2.0)

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I call on the next administration to impeach Windjammer

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This call for impeachment is not to necessarily say Windjammer has never done anything right. I suspect he voted in my favor in the recent Lincoln abortion case and appreciate that. However his actions here are egregious enough that I believe it is justifiable to impeach him.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You know we have a thread for all this and probably would have made Windjammer's comments slightly less problematic (location wise anyway) had he used it.

Quite frankly he should keep it here and continue to justify the case for impeaching him

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Backtrack on this decision and your threats and let the trial go forward. That is the only way you will secure your future at this stage.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Can confirm, had a trial been completed in full and LT found innocent by a jury, I would accept that verdict and move on.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Impeachment is a constitutional process. It’s quite breathtaking that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks merely mentioning, (not even introducing an impeachment resolution) a procedure contained in the constitution is somehow akin to overthrowing the judiciary. And I can assure you, impeachment was not brought up because people didn’t like how the case went.

You and crane considered it because the outcome.didn't go your way. You really don't see a problem with tje Independence of justice if justices get removed When they don't rule a certain way?

Again.

We all would have accepted the outcome of the trial. Your "ruling a certain way" has nothing to do with the grievances you have created as a result of your conduct.

So why were you considering an impeachment if that wasn't about the ruling?

There was no ruling!

So why were you considering an impeachment if that wasn't about the ruling saying the trial was dismissed?

It is about that but that isn't a ruling. A ruling is finding the defendant innocent or guilty, or a law unconstitutional or constitutional. None of that happened here. Instead you aided and abetted the defense in their delay of this trial, eventually threw up your hands and said you couldn't continue the trial because of a delay you helped bring forth, and then issued threats to those who disagreed. I fail to see how anyone can believe you will be impartial going forward.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Impeachment is a constitutional process. It’s quite breathtaking that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks merely mentioning, (not even introducing an impeachment resolution) a procedure contained in the constitution is somehow akin to overthrowing the judiciary. And I can assure you, impeachment was not brought up because people didn’t like how the case went.

You and crane considered it because the outcome.didn't go your way. You really don't see a problem with tje Independence of justice if justices get removed When they don't rule a certain way?

Again.

We all would have accepted the outcome of the trial. Your "ruling a certain way" has nothing to do with the grievances you have created as a result of your conduct.

So why were you considering an impeachment if that wasn't about the ruling?

There was no ruling!

So why were you considering an impeachment if that wasn't about the ruling saying the trial was dismissed?

It is about that but that isn't a ruling. A ruling is finding the defendant innocent or guilty, or a law unconstitutional or constitutional. None of that happened here. Instead you aided and abetted the defense in their delay of this trial, eventually threw up your hands and said you couldn't continue the trial because of a delay you helped bring forth, and then issued threats to those who disagreed. I fail to see how anyone can believe you will be impartial going forward.

I didn't make these threats (and again as a private citizen and not as a "justice") when you were considering impeaching me.

When implies past tense dude, as if my effort has stopped. My campaign to impeach you began before the threats yes, but the threats have only strengthened it, and your stipulation that you made the threats as a private citizen only came after you were called out on said threats.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Can we just admit that the prosecution botched the case? The Court simply works with the evidence presented, and the initial proceedings were mishandled by the people in charge of the prosecution. You can't blame Windjammer or the Court for not ruling your way because you presented a weak case and didn't follow through.

This argument is just silly. Windjammer waited around for weeks before finding an attorney then selected possibly the worst option, and weeks after it was clear Tack wasn't going to further justify an objection. And he has now made threats against those who disagree. Windjammer has plenty of blood on his hands here for aiding and abetting the delay and showing he won't be impartial going forward.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Can we just admit that the prosecution botched the case? The Court simply works with the evidence presented, and the initial proceedings were mishandled by the people in charge of the prosecution. You can't blame Windjammer or the Court for not ruling your way because you presented a weak case and didn't follow through.

This argument is just silly. Windjammer waited around for weeks before finding an attorney then selected possibly the worst option, and weeks after it was clear Tack wasn't going to further justify an objection. And he has now made threats against those who disagree. Windjammer has plenty of blood on his hands hewent AWOre for aiding and abetting the delay and showing he won't be impartial going forward.

tack's inactivity has never been good for the game. But it is ultimately why the proceedings didn't go forward. Why was the jury never objected to? tack had ample time to do so and went AWOL. That's part of the problem in this game. He was unprepared, likely didn't have all the evidence, and was mostly apathetic about the case in my honest opinion.

Now another person is handing the prosecution and getting as much information and testimonies as he can.

Tack did object to the jury, then was asked to explain further, and through inaction showed refusal to do so. Instead of moving on immediately WJ waited weeks to do so.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Can we just admit that the prosecution botched the case? The Court simply works with the evidence presented, and the initial proceedings were mishandled by the people in charge of the prosecution. You can't blame Windjammer or the Court for not ruling your way because you presented a weak case and didn't follow through.

This argument is just silly. Windjammer waited around for weeks before finding an attorney then selected possibly the worst option, and weeks after it was clear Tack wasn't going to further justify an objection. And he has now made threats against those who disagree. Windjammer has plenty of blood on his hands hewent AWOre for aiding and abetting the delay and showing he won't be impartial going forward.

Now another person is handing the prosecution and getting as much information and testimonies as he can.

WJ is not going to accept any further case on this matter that much is clear. LT is a free man unless he is impeached

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You have just blocked it from happening. You say it is because there was no "speedy trial," but you allowed the appointment of a defense attorney to drag on for weeks. Then you allowed a sitting justice to represent the defendant! Then you demanded justification for the dismissal of patrial jurors, contrary to convention. In no other court is a defendant allowed to just ignore the charges against him, then cite the resultant delay as a reason the case should be dismissed!

I am remiss to get involved here, but if I may be so bold as to interject: it was I who urged my fellow justices that the defendant's constitutional rights would be violated if we accepted this case, not windjammer, and he was obviously not the only justice who agreed with me. This constitutional protection exists regardless of what happened in the previous attempt at this trial.

The court unanimously agreed that Justice PiT would serve as court-appointed attorney for the defendant after we tried and failed to find others who could fill the role. Most of the early delay was caused by the court's inability to locate anyone willing and able to represent the defendant, not by anything the defendant himself did or didn't do (and trust me, we tried!). The unorthodox choice of defense attorney was necessary to preserve the defendant's right to a speedy trial, specifically to prevent the outcome that has now occurred.

The presence of the defendant was ultimately not relevant to the conduct of the case - had he not appeared, the case would have continued regardless, only with Justice PiT representing him in absentia.

The only difference that could have reasonably sped up the first portion of the trial would have been if the defendant had selected his own attorney. This however simply cannot be a requirement or expectation we can place on criminal defendants, as the Atlasian Constitution provides all defendants with the right to an attorney, regardless of their ability or willingness to retain an attorney's services of their own initiative. These Constitutional protections are essential and should not be abrogated.

To the best of my knowledge there currently is no accepted convention pertaining to the conduct of voir dire in Atlasia? If one exists, and the prosecution believed the court was not properly adhering to this convention, then surely an objection would have been warranted?


Ultimately to blame the lack of a speedy trial on the defendant or even the court is a gross oversimplification.

During the first trial the prosecution did not provide any justification after challenging two jurors, thereby prolonging voir dire - and the entire trial - for no justifiable reason. The prosecution's three week absence may be forgiven - real life happens, things get in the way - but the ensuing delay of forty-five days before the prosecution even refiled the case? That cannot in good conscience be ignored. It represents a complete disrespect for the constitutional rights of the accused, which exist in our democracy no matter how severe the crimes of which they are accused.

To the bolded - why wait weeks for a justification that was never coming? The correct action would have been to allow 3 or 4 days to justify, then dismiss the objection and proceed to seek testimony from whoever was ready to begin first.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I appreciate BK's testimony on this matter. Ultimately it does not change the fact that Windjammer has made threats and only stipulated later on that it was "in his private capacity". This is equivalent to someone making a public expression of Slander or Libel and then claiming they didn't think it would become public. It doesn't excuse his actions. And of course Windjammer isn't just someone, he is our chief justice and he has shown he is no longer impartial. To those thinking new information would change things, information does not seem to have any relation to the supposed justification for dismissal. It is clear - unless WJ is impeached LT is a free man. And who knows who WJ will fail to be impartial towards going forward. We certainly cannot trust him after tonight.

If Impeachment does not have the votes I am also supportive of Censure.

I have nothing further to say on this matter tonight and the DDNN press office is closing for the evening immediately.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

wtf happened while I was asleep

LT is a free man unless a change is made to the Court

Windjammer is making threats to elected officials and generally showing he will no longer be an impartial judge.