The Court - General Issues

[Darkness' Edge]

I'm getting a bit concerned by the slowness of the proceedings.

Maki still hasn't replied to the thread, which has so far brought the proceedings to a stop, and we seem to have two active justices, in myself and -Groucho-, which isn't making the process any faster. Of the other three, one only checks in every few days, one doesn't seem to respond to email, and the other hasn't had anything to do with the case whatsoever.

Any ideas as to what we can do about this?

[H Tower]

add another judge (me )

[Nubclear]

Remove me.

Why the fish does it seem when everything clears in my life....I get sick?!

[Darkness' Edge]

I didn't mean -that-, Tass.

You're the one who's otherwise perfect, but doesn't respond to email.

[Pandemoniak]

I already said I refuse the case cause I'm too concerned, thats why I dont respond the emails.

[Darkness' Edge]

Thanks for clearing that up...I must have missed that.

It's still making things really hard, though. It's not really that big an involvement. Hell, even if the naming is unconstitutional, it still polled well, and will most likely be voted in eventually. Would you consider being involved in this case anyway? We really need the extra active hand.

[Drogue]

Is it possible to elect another couple of Judges? If we need 3 per trial and only have a pool of 5 to choose from this couldm become a common problem.

[Pandemoniak]

DE, my opinion to this case is that indeed the constitution hasnt been followed by the book. This is not the first time, and I recall you did worst yourself.
About this case, maybe we could simply discuss an amendment to clarify and simplify the constitution about this, while we sentence Makhi to some minor punishment.
About the bases already named, we could keep them this way, cause it would be far too boring to repoll for every base.

About the case being to long to be dealt with, I personnaly hink that one judge is enough to deal with a case. We therefore keep our five justices as they are, and appoint only one of them per case.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
About the case being to long to be dealt with, I personnaly hink that one judge is enough to deal with a case. We therefore keep our five justices as they are, and appoint only one of them per case.

I disagree with this. We need more than one judge to prevent the sentancing and verdict to be all the work of one person. People have different opinions and so we need to have debate between judges on each case. I don't know a court on Old Earth when the verdict was given by a singular judge. I think the right to have more than one judge discuss your case is vital to our court procedure, especially on contitutional issues.

I agree with Pande's other ideas though.

[Pandemoniak]

We need more than one judge to prevent the sentancing and verdict to be all the work of one person.

You forgot theres a jury.

[Drogue]

Is there? I thought they were using the model of a UN or USA constitutional court whereby the verdict is given by an enlightened judge, since the common public were deemed to not be able to understand all the complexities. If not then sorry... my mistake.

Do we have a jury for this case yet?

[Pandemoniak]

The jury is the whole population appealed to vote. Like in the Lemmy's case, which males jurispudence.

[Darkness' Edge]

A rewrite of the Court amendment could be a good idea, but really, if a justice isn't/can't going to regularly serve, they should resign.

Pande - where has the Constitution not been followed? AFAIK, I've done this exactly by the book. FFS, I wrote the bloody amendment - you don't think I know what's in it?

Also, I don't know where the idea of a jury came from. It isn't in the amendment, it wasn't in the formal proposal voted on, and while it could be polled to clear it up, as far as I'm concerned, there isn't one. People voted for the same form of proceedings as the C3DG. In the C3DG, there is no jury.

Leave the jury for the roleplay cases, and let us get on with our job. Otherwise we don't even need justices.

[Pandemoniak]

You didnt followed the constitution at the very beginning, where you played the game without polling, etc.. IIRC. Its ok though.

[Darkness' Edge]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
DE, my opinion to this case is that indeed the constitution hasnt been followed by the book. This is not the first time, and I recall you did worst yourself.

Pande, you implied that I had broken the Constitution in this case. [edit] Hell, you went beyond implying - you said that in this case, I broke the Constitution. [/edit] Everyone knows I had problems in the first week of the game, while we were getting started, and its old news. I'm getting really sick of these accusations of unconstitutional behaviour - where it's either ancient news or I haven't done anything wrong.

If you have a problem with me, take it up with the Court and we can both step aside. Otherwise, leave me the hell alone, and quit the accusations.

I'm really concerned about this idea of a jury. As far as I knew, this was never on the agenda, as there's been no mention of it. If a jury does happen, then we've wasted our time electing Justices in the first place, because there's no need. As such, if there is going to be a jury, then I will resign.