| 46566 v Croxoco | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 28 2015, 09:27 PM (66 Views) | |
| Arcadia | May 28 2015, 09:27 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Case Summary: On the subject of the legality of the use of IC influence and/or power. The plaintiff, 46566, calls into question whether the actions of Croxoco are legal in allegedly attempting to coerce a group into a given course of action within the Out of Character government through the use of IC influence. Plaintiff: 46566 Defendant: Croxoco (Charlie T. O. Jones) Plaintiff's Evidence:
Presiding Justice: Arcadia Associate Judicial Personnel:
The presiding justice is currently taking the advice of the RPMT. It should be noted that the defendant has since withdrawn his statements and has apologised; if this is sufficient does the Plaintiff wish to drop the charges, allowing the defendant to avoid a criminal sentence? In any event a ruling shall be made on the subject of the legality of these actions. |
![]() |
|
| Airatania | May 28 2015, 09:36 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
I do not feel it is just for us to provide a ruling on the situation if charges are dropped. Only if 46566 decides to move forward do I believe a ruling should be made, whatever that ruling may be. If the charges are dropped, I think the proper course of action is legislative in nature, meaning we should develop draft legislation to be presented to the Assembly to prevent situations like this from occurring in the future. |
![]() |
|
| Charlie T. O. Jones | May 28 2015, 09:40 PM Post #3 |
|
I Confess to All Charges and will accept any penalty determined by the Court in accordance with the Criminal Law of this Region. |
![]() |
|
| Arcadia | May 28 2015, 09:40 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Administrator
|
By ruling I refer to the establishment of precedent on the subject to fill any void in the law; rather than sentencing. If the charges are dropped there will be a ruling but no sentence. |
![]() |
|
| Arcadia | May 28 2015, 09:45 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I have contacted and notified the Plaintiff of the case and of the developments, including the apology and retraction. From this point I ask that all persons refrain from posting here until the Plaintiff has a chance to post. Thank you. |
![]() |
|
| 46566 | May 30 2015, 05:08 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
I'd withdraw my complaint but would like a summary verdict to serve us as precedent in the case that something similar happens in the future. |
![]() |
|
| Arcadia | May 30 2015, 08:07 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Administrator
|
The charges have been dropped by the Plaintiff. The Court shall return a ruling on the legality of the Defendant's actions, however no sentence shall be passed. Therefore I rule the following: While the actions of Croxoco are not specifically defined as illegal by existing statute the abuse of IC power to affect OOC outcomes is considered to be a grave breach of Role Playing conventions and rules. Therefore these actions are to be considered illegal by implication under REF#2.5.2 and REF#2.5.5 of the Criminal Code Act 2015, wherein it states that 'Major or persistent breaches in RP rules' and 'Issuing threats against another player outside the context of RP' are indictable offences. To summarise, though not specifically illegal the scope of REF#2.5 does make clear that the examples listed under this section are not exhaustive. Therefore we can conclude, from the nature and intent of the examples given that to threaten the use of IC power to affect OOC affairs is illegal. As a temporary measure, until legislation can be brought to fully cover this matter, the Court rules that this course of action should be considered illegal, should it occur again, and shall be considered an Indictable Offence. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · The Court of the Coalition · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:54 AM Jul 11
|









8:54 AM Jul 11