South v. 352 NPC Rioters

[Mr. Reactionary]

South v. 352 NPC Rioters

On behalf of the Southern Regional Government, we hereby bring this writ for preliminary bail hearing to the Southern Circuit Court Justice pursuant to the Constitution of the South and the F.U. Rioters Act.

Under Southern law, "A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph [for rioting] shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance." See Exhibit A.

On February 8, the GMs determined that deadly riots occurred in Maryland, Kansas, and Florida, nominally in protest of a widely popular Constitutional Amendment that passed with more than 80% of the popular vote. See Exhibit B. These objectively fringe, violent rioters have, according to the GM Office caused 9 deaths and millions of dollars in damages. Several are suspected members of Antifa, which has been designated as a terrorist organization under Southern law. See Exhibit C.

The GM Office has confirmed that Southern law enforcement has 352 rioters in custody for their participation in these insurrectionist, seditious, treasonous riots. Given the severity of the riots, and the likelihood of future riots, since again these criminals are rioting over a policy that more than 80% of Southerners support, we believe that there is a great public risk by releasing these violent insurrectionists at this time. We therefore petition this Court to deny bail to each imprisoned rioter, pursuant to Southern law, until such time as each rioter stands trial for these heinous crimes.

I ask for this.

- R, Southern Attorney General

[Mr. Reactionary]

Exhibit A

F.U.RIOTERS ACT

TITLE I: NAME AND ENACTMENT

1. This act shall be referred to as the Fighting Useless Rioters Act or the F.U. Rioters Act.

2. Unless otherwise stated herein, the provisions of this act shall take effect immediately.

TITLE II: DEFINTIONS

1. As used in this act the following terms are defined as such:
“Conditions arising from the emergency” means civil unrest, power outages, curfews, voluntary or mandatory evacuations, or a reduction in the presence of or response time for law enforcement, emergency services, other first responders, or homeland security personnel.

“Conditions arising from the riot” means civil unrest, power outages, curfews, or a reduction in the presence of or response time for law enforcement, emergency services, other first responders, or homeland security personnel.

“Memorial” means a plaque, marker, statue, monument, obelisk, marker, flag, banner, cenotaph, relief, engraving, stained-glass window, religious symbol, painting, seal, tombstone, cannon, sign, structure name, or display that is constructed and located with the intent of being permanently displayed or perpetually maintained; is dedicated to a historical person, an entity, an event, or a series of events;  and honors or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel, or the past or present public service or historical significance of a resident of the geographical area comprising the State or the Region or Atlasia.

TITLE III: RIOTING

1. A person who participates in a public disturbance involving an assembly of three (3) or more persons acting with a common intent to mutually assist each other in:

A. disorderly and violent conduct resulting in injury or damage to another person or property;

B. creating a clear and present danger of injury or damage to another person or property; or

C. by force, or threat of force, endangering the safe movement of a person or vehicle traveling on a public street, highway, road, trail, sidewalk, or parking area,

is guilty of rioting. Rioting is a felony and shall be punishable by imprisonment for no less than six (6) months and no more than five (5) years and a fine of not more than $100,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

2. A person who willfully incites or encourages another to imminently or at a specific time participate in a riot, resulting in a riot, civil disturbance, or a clear and present danger of a riot or civil disturbance, is guilty of inciting a riot. Inciting a riot is a felony and shall be punishable by imprisonment for no less than six (6) months and no more than five (5) years and a fine of not more than $100,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

3. If three (3) or more persons meet together to commit a breach of the peace, or to do any other unlawful act, each of them is guilty of participating in an unlawful assembly. Participating in an unlawful assembly is a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by imprisonment for no more than (6) months and a fine of not more than $10,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

4. A person who, assembled with two (2) or more other persons and acting with a common intent, compels or induces, or attempts to compel or induce, another person by force, or threat of force, to do any act or to assume or abandon a particular viewpoint is guilty of mob intimidation. Mob intimidation is a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by imprisonment for no more than (6) months and a fine of not more than $10,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

5. A person who, being in another State, Region, or country, travels to another State within the Southern Region for the purpose of participating in a riot, incitement of a riot, unlawful assembly, or mob intimidation shall be guilty of a separate felony punishable by imprisonment for no more than (6) months and a fine of not more than $10,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

TITLE IV: CRIMES COMMITTED DURING RIOTS

1. A person who assaults another person in furtherance of a riot commits a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for no more than 60 days and a fine of not more than $1,000.

2. A person who commits a battery in furtherance of a riot commits a felony, punishable by imprisonment for no more than (6) months and a fine of not more than $10,000.

3. A person who commits a battery on a law enforcement officer, emergency services personnel, other first responder, or homeland security personnel in furtherance of a riot commits a felony, punishable by imprisonment for no more than (9) months and a fine of not more than $10,000. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

4. A person who commits a burglary during a riot and the perpetration of the burglary is facilitated by conditions arising from the riot; or within a locality that is subject to a state of emergency after the declaration of emergency is made and the perpetration of the burglary is facilitated by conditions arising from the emergency, the burglary shall be considered a separate felony punishable by imprisonment for no more than (6) months and a fine of not more than $10,000 along with restitution. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

5. A person who commits theft during a riot and the perpetration of the theft is facilitated by conditions arising from the riot; or within a locality that is subject to a state of emergency after the declaration of emergency is made and the perpetration of the theft is facilitated by conditions arising from the emergency, the theft shall be considered a separate misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for no more than (3) months and a fine of not more than $1,000 along with restitution.

6. A person who willfully damages or destroys law enforcement equipment, firefighting equipment, emergency services’ equipment, or other first responders’ equipment, or who willfully obstructs a fire hydrant or other firefighting apparatus during a civil disturbance is guilty of criminal assholery. Criminal assholery is a felony and shall be punishable by imprisonment for one (1) year and a fine of $10,000 along with restitution.

TITLE V: FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT

1. A person who intentionally or willfully obstructs the free, convenient, and normal use of a any public street, highway, road, trail, sidewalk, or parking area by blocking, impeding, hindering, stifling, or restraining traffic or passage thereon, by standing or remaining on the street, highway, or road or approaching motor vehicles thereon, or by endangering the safe movement of vehicles or pedestrians traveling thereon is guilty of obstructing the freedom of movement. Obstructing freedom of movement is a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by imprisonment for no more than (1) year and a fine of not more than $10,000. A violation of this paragraph against a law enforcement, firefighting, emergency services, or other first responder vehicle shall receive the maximum punishment allowed herein, provide that such vehicle had its emergency lights illuminated at the time of the violation.  

2. A person arrested for a violation of this title who committed such obstruction during a riot shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

TITLE VI. VANDALISM AND DESECRATION

1. Any person who, without the consent of the owner thereof, willfully and maliciously defaces, injures, or otherwise damages by any means a memorial and the value of the damage to the memorial is greater than $100 is guilty of heinous vandalism. Heinous vandalism is a felony punishable by imprisonment for no less than (6) months and no more than one (1) year and a fine of not more than $25,000. A violation of this paragraph during a riot or unlawful assembly shall receive the maximum punishment allowed herein. A court shall order any person convicted of violating this paragraph to provide a written apology and pay restitution, which shall include the full cost of repair or replacement of such memorial.

2. Any person who, without the consent of the owner thereof, willfully and maliciously destroys or demolishes any memorial, or pulls down a memorial is guilty of heinous desecration. Heinous desecration is a felony punishable by imprisonment for no less than (1) year and no more than five (5) years and a fine of not more than $100,000. A violation of this paragraph during a riot or unlawful assembly shall receive the maximum punishment allowed herein.  A court shall order any person convicted of violating this paragraph to provide a written apology and pay restitution, which shall include the full cost of repair or replacement of such memorial.

3. Any person who, willfully and knowingly destroys, mutilates, defaces, injures, or removes any tomb, monument, gravestone, burial mound, earthen or shell monument containing human skeletal remains or associated burial artifacts, or other structure or thing placed or designed for a memorial of the dead, or any fence, railing, curb, or other thing intended for the protection or ornamentation of the aforementioned objects is guilty of ghoulish desecration. Ghoulish desecration is a felony punishable by imprisonment for no less than (1) year and no more than five (5) years and a fine of not more than $100,000. A violation of this paragraph during a riot or unlawful assembly shall receive the maximum punishment allowed herein.  A violation of this paragraph in which a person willfully and knowingly excavates, exposes, moves, removes, or otherwise disturbs the contents of a grave or tomb shall receive the maximum punishment allowed herein. A court shall order any person convicted of violating this paragraph to provide a written apology and pay restitution, which shall include the full cost of repair or replacement of any damages.

TITLE VII: SOROS-OWNED POLITICIANS

1. An elected official, prosecutor, or governing body, of a State or locality within the Southern Region that intentionally obstructs or interferes with the ability of a law enforcement agency to provide reasonable law enforcement protection during a riot or unlawful assembly is civilly liable for any damages, including damages arising from personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage, proximately caused by the agency’s failure to provide reasonable law enforcement protection during a riot or unlawful assembly. Sovereign immunity of the locality shall be waived in such a scenario.

TITLE VIII: IMMUNITY

1. In a criminal prosecution for a crime of violence or property damage resulting from a vehicle striking a pedestrian, it is an affirmative defense that such crime arose from injury or damage sustained by a participant acting in furtherance of a riot, unlawful assembly, mob intimidation, obstruction of freedom of movement, heinous vandalism, heinous desecration, or ghoulish desecration. The affirmative defense authorized by this paragraph shall be established by evidence that the charged person attempted in good-faith to avoid the injured or damaged person or property and that the injured or damaged person was a participant in such abovementioned crimes by clear and convincing evidence.

2. In a civil action for damages for personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage, it is an affirmative defense that such action arose from injury or damage sustained by a participant acting in furtherance of a riot, unlawful assembly, mob intimidation, criminal assholery, obstruction of freedom of movement, heinous vandalism, heinous desecration, or ghoulish desecration. The affirmative defense authorized by this paragraph shall be established by evidence that the plaintiff was a participant in such crime by preponderance of the evidence.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Exhibit B

Protests over secession rhetoric in The South:
By Authors:

Wichita, Kansas
For the past week, mass protests have swept the South, after Governor Young Texan unilaterally announced plans for the South’s secession from the Union. The Federal Government so far has struggled to intervene, despite President Cao’s announcement of the appointment of a commission to discuss the South’s status in relation to Atlasia at large.


The protests, largely peaceful at first, but often escalating into at times worrying violence, especially in states along the Lincoln and Fremont borders, has already caused millions in property damage, as well as the deaths of nine civilians, six of them in Baltimore during a protest march, two in Wichita when protesters set fire to the offices of the Wichita Eagle, killing both an opinion columnist and the sports editor, and one in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, when a protester ran over a CNN Cameraman with a golf cart.

Not all Southern Residents, however, oppose the idea of secession. The referendum passed with over 75% support, although some polls show that those supporting secession were more “soft” in their support than those who were not. Still, some states have higher levels of support for the move than others.  Indeed, in two states, Texas, and Alabama, secession has an overwhelming amount of support from the populace, and protests in both states were largely muted.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Exhibit C

A.N.D.Y. N.G.O. ACT

1. This act shall be known as the Antiterrorism Needed to Destroy Yuppie No Good Organizations Act or A.N.D.Y. N.G.O. Act.

2. The Southern Region hereby declares the group identified as "Anti-Fascist Action" or "Antifa" as a terrorist organization. Any member of Antifa that is convicted of:

A. a crime of violence;

B. a crime requiring registration as a sex offender;

C. a crime requiring registration as an animal, food, or ecological terrorist;

D. a violation of the F.U. Rioters Act;

E. a violation of the Banning Racist Curriculum Act, as amended;

F. A violation of Title IV of the Fraudulent Deceit Is A Sin Act;

G. A violation of the Malevolent Magic Is A Sin Act;

H. A violation of the Lynching Is A Sin Act;

I. A violation of the Pagan Sacrifice Is A Sin Act;

J. A violation of the Monkeypox Prevention Act;

K. A violation of the S.T.D. Act; or

L. A violation of the Promoting Holy Hygiene Act

shall be included in the animal, food, and ecological terrorist registry.

3. This act shall take effect immediately.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     This has been seen. I will look into recruiting defense counsel for the defendants in this case.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Giving confirmation from the GM team that this is the number of persons currently arrested for rioting. More may come in the following days and weeks depending on how the situation progresses.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Mr. Scott has agreed to serve as defense counsel for the accused. Mr. Reactionary, am I to understand that Exhibits A-C posted above are offered to make the case that there is probable cause to charge the defendants?

[Mr. Reactionary]

     Mr. Scott has agreed to serve as defense counsel for the accused. Mr. Reactionary, am I to understand that Exhibits A-C posted above are offered to make the case that there is probable cause to charge the defendants?

Yes your honor, along with the confirmation from GM Weatherboy of the number of defendants and circumstances under which they were arrested. What we ask for in this particular hearing is merely a determination of bail eligibility prior to trial.

This hearing is not intended to be trial itself but merely the hearing as required by the F.U. Rioters Act, specifically

. A person arrested for a violation of this paragraph shall be held in custody until brought before the court for a bail hearing. At such hearing the court shall determine if permitting bail presents a probable risk of future rioting or civil disturbance.

It is our position that given the violent nature of the crimes, the lack of any reasonable provocation for such crimes, the on-going political dispute over the purported cause of the riots, and the lack of a story from the GMs confirming the cessation of the riots, that releasing these bad-faith rioters presents an almost certain risk of future rioting and civil disturbance. Accordingly, to protect the public safety and under both statute and the long storied principles of denying bail under such circumstances, we ask the court to issue a finding in our favor that releasing the defendants presents a probable risk of future rioting and civil disturbance and thus bail be denied to the defendants pending trials.

Thank you.

- R, Southern Attorney General

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Your Honor, I represent the defendants in this matter. In our nation it is imperative that any finding from a judge affecting the rights of a defendant be based in law and not contradict the Constitution. Accordingly, I ask that each of my clients be treated fairly and without prejudice; that the law and each element thereof be construed in favor of my clients where appropriate; that no undue harm be levied against my clients; and that your decision be based in law.

None of my clients have expressed desire to waive their rights, to admit guilt or to otherwise incriminate themselves.

Therefore, on behalf of the accused, I reject all claims made by the Southern Attorney General. I will also emphasize that Mr. Weatherboy has indicated that 352 people were arrested, and yet guilt has not been proven for any one of them thus far. Mr. Reactionary must prove that there is reasonable cause for denying bail to all 352 of those aforementioned people.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Thank you both for your opening statements. Mr. Reactionary, will the prosecution now show probable cause to hold the accused?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Bumping this back to the first page (and as a reminder to Mr. Reactionary that the court is still waiting on him to present evidence).

[Mr. Reactionary]

First, please allow me to apologize for the delay. Between elections, wrapping up the session, and a lot of real life obligations ive been forced to meet due to a serious surgery i am having on Friday, my schedule has been hectic lately.

To address each request of my friend on the other side:

First as to the legality and Constitutionality of this proceeding, this case arises under a Southern law duly passed by the Southern chamber more than a year ago and original jurisdiction lies with this court as cited herein.

""1. The judicial power of The South shall be vested in the Southern Circuit Court, whose membership is the Associate Justice from The South.

2. The jurisdiction of the Southern Circuit Court shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution and all official acts made under its authority and to controversies between two or more citizens of the South. ..."

That law, included as an exhibit above, sets criminal penalties for rioting and crimes committed during a riot. Additionally, this law sets procedural rules for bail eligibility for defendants which is the step we are currently at. To spare the court hundreds of separate cases, these cases have all been consolidated into a single case at this stage under a writ of joinder. Such writ is authorized by the Southern constitution under the All Writs Clause which states

"Equitable remedies shall be solely reserved for the judiciary which shall possess the power to issue all writs to provide an adequate remedy."

So we submit that this case is constitutionally and lawfully proper. Additionally, this law does not violate any federal or southern constitutional rights related to bail. The southern bill of rights states

"Excessive bail shall not be required nor unreasonably denied when the suspect is not a flight or safety risk"

The federal bill of rights similarly states

"No person accused of crimes under the laws of this Republic, or of the several Regions, shall be compelled to bear witness against themself, nor subjected to excessive bail, nor cruel or unusual punishment."

The federal language is modeled off the former 8th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. According to the constitutions drafters and the Atlasian Supreme Court absent significant textual changes to a US Constitutional clause carried over into Atlasia, the US Supreme Court law interpreting such clause shall be viewed as persuasive. See S019 v. South (2021). The US Supreme Court has long held that while there is a general presumption of bail, there is not an absolute right to bail when a court after due process finds that the defendant poses a safety risk if released. See US v Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) "The argument that the Act violates substantive due process because the detention it authorizes constitutes impermissible punishment before trial is unpersuasive. The Act's legislative history clearly indicates that Congress formulated the detention provisions not as punishment for dangerous individuals, but as a potential solution to the pressing societal problem of crimes committed by persons on release. Preventing danger to the community is a legitimate regulatory goal."

We therefore submit that the bail hearing in this case is fully constitutional and is not unfairly prejudicial to defendants but rather is a legitimate regulatory goal to prevent likely risks to public safety. Each defendant is being treated equally and fairly, as this case is consolidated and thus no one has been granted privileged or discriminatory treatment.

As to the elements, we believe that has been met by the GM Office. Under the Atlasian constitution and laws passed pursuant thereto, the GM Office has the ultimate decision making power over NPC Actions. In this case, the GM Office determined, as found in the appendix above, that rioting did in fact occur in violation of the Souths anti-riot law and that the number and identities of the NPCs arrested for such crimes are the 352 defendants in this proceeding. The GM Office also stated that the motivation of the rioters was a recently passed southern constitutional amendment that passed with greater than 80% of the vote. Further, the GM Office has not published any updates stating that the riots have abated. Therefore, we submit that factually, pursuant to constitutional and federal law, each defendant in this proceeding is properly before this court and the on-going safety risk is self-evident. We do not seek any conviction from this court, this is merely a procedural hearing to provide adequate due process to defendants. And we do believe such due process is adequate as each has had notice of the law, benefit of counsel, and no federal or regional rights are being violated by the proceeding.

Therefore we submit that a finding by this court in our favor is based in law and is not unduly harmful or prejudicial to defendants.

In reply to my friends argument that guilt must be individually proven during a bail hearing, we submit that such is not the standard. This is not a trial, this is merely a bail hearing. Based on the plain reading of the federal and southern bail clauses and the traditional understanding as espoused in the Salerno case cited above, all that need be proven as a matter of law at this stage is that the defendants were arrested for violating the anti-riot law and that releasing such defendants on bail poses a safety risk. We believe that the GM story, which is to be viewed as mandatorily factual under law, proves these claims. The reasonable cause that has been requested by my friend then is met through the GM story.

Therefore the South requests this Court deny bail to the defendants pending trial.

I am happy to answer any further questions with the notice that on Friday march 3 I will be unavailable due to surgery.

Thank you to the court.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Thank you for your time, Mr. Reactionary. Mr. Scott, your response?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

No further comment. I thank the Court for its time and for having the opportunity to represent anyone in a case in 9 years.

[Mr. Reactionary]

No further comment. I thank the Court for its time and for having the opportunity to represent anyone in a case in 9 years.

You now probably have the record for most clients ever represented in Atlasia.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Thank you both. Considering the arguments of both sides, I will deny bail for the accused in this case, as there is probable cause to believe letting them go free would be a major threat to public safety.

     With that said, Mr. Scott is correct that guilt must be proven for each of them individually, and so 352 defendants would mean 352 trials. This is quite unprecedented in the history of Atlasia and not feasible to execute within the bounds of the game, so my thought is to hold one actual trial and ask the game moderation team to simulate the rest. I invite Messrs. Reactionary and Scott to submit their thoughts on this matter before we proceed.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

I would be ok with that. I think the GM team can summarize the remaining trials in a story, with some interesting cases noted. I can come up with one of the NPCs in this case and the details around their arrest, for the purpose of the trial.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

If Mr. Reactionary and the GM team are on board, so am I.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Could be fun.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I would be ok with that. I think the GM team can summarize the remaining trials in a story, with some interesting cases noted. I can come up with one of the NPCs in this case and the details around their arrest, for the purpose of the trial.

     I appreciate the help. When do you think you can have a story ready? I want to have that set before we proceed to jury selection, since those details are generally pertinent to selection.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

If either of the gentlemen representing a side in the case may make a request in the appropriate thread as laid out in GM Team Directive #1 we will get to it with haste.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Here is the profile of one of the rioters and the circumstances around his arrest. If more elaboration is needed I will gladly provide.

Profile: Daniel Peers
Age: 25
Occupation: Retail Worker
Hometown: Smyrna, GA
Location of Arrest: Atlanta, GA

Background: Mr. Peers was participating in the “March Against Secession” in downtown Atlanta when tensions escalated into a full-out riot. No evidence exists showing that Mr. Peers instigated the riot. The main evidence presented against Mr. Peers in the rioting is an image of someone with a bandana on, roughly matching Mr. Peers’ appearance, lighting and preparing to throw a molotov cocktail at an empty police cruiser. He is pictured wearing a blue hoodie, a black t-shirt with white lettering, and jeans. He was arrested shortly afterwards, wearing the same shirt and jeans though the hoodie and bandana were unable to be found. Mr. Peers has refused to make statements on the image, continuously citing his Article I, Section 9 and Miranda rights.

Mr. Peers’ social media pages have been found, with posts including praise for the Cuban government and calling S.22.1-24 (F.U. RIOTERS ACT) unconstitutional. However, nothing indicates a violent past, nor premeditation for violent acts.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Thank you for your service. We will go ahead and proceed with jury selection as a next step. I will randomly select a jury pool later today and we can proceed from there.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     And the RNG has selected NC Yankee, Razze, Spiral, TheSaint250, HillGoose, and ghost_white. I will give Messrs. Reactionary and Scott up to 72 hours to either accept the panel or show cause why any members should be removed.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

No objection to the panel.