Attn Justices: Atlasia vs. Keystone Phil

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I have discussed this with the Chief Justice, and we have agreed that I shall serve as presiding justice for this case.  However, since the alleged offense involved establishing a second registration in the state of Ohio, I find that alleged offense took place in the Mideast Region, not the Northeast Region and that therefore in accordance with Article III Section 2 Clause 7 of the Constitution, a jury shall be selected according to the laws of the Mideast Region, as soon as I have been able to find them, if they exist.  I hope to be able rule further on procedural issues this afternoon or evening.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Jury Selection Act of March 2005 is overridden by the provisions of the Second Constitution of April 2005 on this matter to the extent necessary. The Second Constitution requires that an offense occurring in the Mideast use Mideast law for selecting a jury.  Had the Mideast not passed its own law concerning juries then the Federal law would have been applicable to determining how to select the jury to the extent it does not contradict the Second Constitution.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I have determined, in accordance with the
Mideast Jury Selection Statute that if this advances to a jury trial the pool of potential jurors will be (names as per the voter roles kept by the SoFA):
afleitch
benconstine
downwithdaleft
Frodo 
Hannibal
Inks.LWC
Joe Republic
MasterJedi
opebo
Peter
Realpolitik
senseiofj324

In order to provided a balance between having a larger jury pool and not including inactives, this pool consists of those Mideast citizens who voted in either of the two prior elections.  If you believe someone has been excluded from or included in by error, please send your concerns to me by PM.  Jury selection will take place no sooner than the earlier of Monday or when the Attorney General files the brief required by Section 7 Paragraph 4 Clause i of the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Using a good old fashioned d12 from my days playing D&D, I have selected the following jurors from the jury pool.

benconstine (Warner for Senate '08)
downwithdaleft (24 DuPont Chevy)
Inks.LWC
Joe Republic
opebo
Realpolitik (Al)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I shall give consideration to replacing Mr. Downwithdaleft (and other jurors) on the jury if he does not make an appearance by Monday.  Also if there fails to be a good cause for such failure, jurors failing to show may be held in contempt of court.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There will be no executions. As for the rest, I ask juror Joe to state for the record whether his statements concerning the defendant's guilt were serious or intended as a misplaced jest.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

(I sincerely hope that my innate prejudice against Italian-Americans, Republicans and Pennsylvanians, as well as my core belief that all trial defendants are automatically guilty, doesn't interfere with the fair conduct of this case.)

Your Honor,

After reading this statement, I ask the court to expell the juror and have him executed.

Calm down, I'm sure he was only joking.

You need to go, too. To the chair with you!

The defendant will cease suggesting execution (or even worse, that jurors assemble IKEA products since that would be an even worse chair to sentence one to) or counsel will be assigned to you.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

When will the trial start?

As soon as the jury is fully impaneled.  If our missing juror has not sworn by the time I check in Monday, then he'll be replaced and we should be able to proceed once the replacement has been sworn.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As downwithdaleft has visited the forum since I sent out the jury notice and has not responded to either my PM or to this thread, I find him in contempt of court and order that his voting privileges be suspended until he posts in this thread or this trial is over.

However, this trial must proceed, and accordingly I have randomly selected another juror from the pool.  The lucky citizen who gets to participate in this jury's august deliberations is:
     Peter.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You may be seated.  As the jury has now been seated and sworn, you may now proceed to present your case Attorney General Hashemite.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The lucky citizen who gets to participate in this jury's august deliberations is:
     Peter.

You won't be deliberating until august!?

That would be a Capital idea, but the jury is expected to begin deliberating as soon as the defense rests, so I hope their august deliberations will not have to wait until August.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Is it possible to be excused from the jury on grounds of ill health?

Not at the moment, since jury deliberations could continue until your leave of absence from the DEA is finished, since you've indicated that you hope it to be about a week.  In the event you prove unable to return in a timely fashion, then I'll select a replacement juror if need be, but since the Mideast Jury Selection Statue specifies that four jurors are sufficient to convict, then unless the jury is closely divided that may not be needed.

I have some questions for the Attorney General.  Is it allowed for me to question him?

In a real life trial you would not, so no.  However jurors may ask questions of the judge if they are unclear on anything after the prosecution and defense have finished their cases and I have charged the jury.

Does the Attorney General have any more to say, or does the prosecution rest?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The defense may proceed.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Does the prosecution have any rebuttal or objections to make concerning what the defense has said?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since the prosecution has not chosen to reply to my last query, I shall assume that he does not have any rebuttal or objections to make, so I shall charge the jury.

The defendant is charged with violating the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act and in particular, clause 3 of section 1 of that Act:

"Voter fraud, defined as the creation of identities other than ones primary identity in Atlasia and subsequently entering this identity into the tally of registered voters. "

In order to find the defendant guilty of voter fraud, you must therefore answer the following two questions in the affirmative.

1.  Did the defendant at the time of the alleged crime possess a "primary identity in Atlasia"?
2.  Did the defendant at the time of the alleged crime enter an identity into the tally of registered voters?

The intent of the defendant and the effect of the actions undertaken under the name of "Jessica Walterstein" are not to be considered by you as the jury as you make your decision, tho they may play a role in determining sentence if you find the defendant guilty as charged.

Jurors may choose to discuss the case here, and may cast their verdict as soon as they feel they have come to a decision on the facts.  Under Mideast jury law, the decision of four jurors is sufficient to determine guilt or innocence.  To give jurors a chance to reflect on their decisions, jurors are  free to change their decision until a final decision is reached.  To allow sufficient time for them to do their job, no verdict will be considered final until both 72 hours have passed since the jury was charged, and four jurors have agreed on the same verdict for a period of 24 hours.

If jurors have any questions, they may ask the judge.

Until a decision is reached, a post in this thread by anyone other than a juror or this judge may subject the poster to punishment for contempt of court.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Your Honour,

If a juror feels there has been an error of procedure or a violation of constitutional rights of the defendant, is it permissable to vote "Not Guilty" even if we feel the evidence presented is sufficient to convict the defendant?

The question of whether there has been an error of procedure or a violation of rights is a question of law, not of fact under a common law system such as that used by Atlasia.  Questions of law are for the presiding judge or an appelate judge to decide.  As such it would not be within the scope of the jury to decide that question directly, tho if a juror's concerns on such a point are sufficent as to cause that juror to doubt the credibility of a piece of evidence, it would be within his judgement to discount or ignore such evidence when reaching a verdict.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Your Honor,

Is there a definition of "Primary identity"?

Not much beyond the dictionary definition in either the law or legislative history thereof.  The "in Atlasia" qualifier would clearly serve to make a Forum account not used for participation in Atlasia as not counting for the purposes of the Act, but what standard is to be used in judging participation or primariness is not given.

Also, the definition of voter fraud isn't making sense to me, particularly "ones primary identity in Atlasia."  Is that supposed to read "one primary identity" or "one's primary identity"?

The latter, since that is the reading given in the Voter Fraud Act which the relevant portion of the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act was based on.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

While we do have enough juror votes for a verdict, I'm going to wait a little while longer to give the remaining juror a chance to vote and perhaps persuade another juror that their vote should be changed.  I have sent a PM reminding that juror that he's on the jury.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The jury have voted 4 Guilty and 2 Not Guilty, thus a verdict of Guilty has been rendered by the jury.

In my judgment, no direct injury was either intended or inflicted by the defendant.  However, I am troubled by a definite pattern involving the nature of fake identities in Atlasia.  Like Girl Gone Wild before her, Jessica Walterstein was a fake female identity in a forum and body politic that is sadly lacking much female participation.  I am concerned that such impersonations intimidate greater participation by actual females by creating the perception that they will be mocked or otherwise treated as not worthy of politics here.  I note that intimidation of citizens under some circumstances is considered treason under Atlasian law, though those circumstances do not pertain to this case as no force or violence was involved.  Still, that law clearly indicates that it is the judgment of the Atlasian people as voiced through their government that intimidation is something to be treated seriously.  I am not of the opinion that the defendant consciously chose to use a female identity for the purpose of mocking females, but I am of the opinion that was the result.

As for sentence, I sentence the defendant, Keystone Phil, to a ban from voting for a period of one week and a ban from holding office for a period of six months.

Ernest
Associate Justice of Atlasia

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since an appeal has been filed, I am suspending the sentence until the appeal has come to a conclusion unless the defendant indicates that he does not wish such a suspension during the appeal.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As downwithdaleft has visited the forum since I sent out the jury notice and has not responded to either my PM or to this thread, I find him in contempt of court and order that his voting privileges be suspended until he posts in this thread or this trial is over.

As the trial phase of this case has been concluded, downwithdaleft is no longer subject to the previous order.