HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 [Traitorousness] Dark_devil vs Cornwall - Guilty

Go down 
AuthorMessage
baiboe
Archivist


Number of posts : 433
Registration date : 2005-11-12

PostSubject: [Traitorousness] Dark_devil vs Cornwall - Guilty   Fri 11 Aug - 15:55

Bill of indictment wrote:
The defendant was behind the plan to overtake the town of Barnstaple! He, along with his accomplice, Urshak (also being tried). We have proof that it was this Dark Devil that masterminded this underhanded attempt to subvert the authority our king has invested in the Council of Cornwall!

Dark Devil is an infamous career criminal, and the leader of the heinous organization known as the Hell's Masters! They have changed their name to The Wolves of Sherwood, but their tactics have not changed. They are still traitors to our wonderful nation. If not for teh courageous efforts of the CRG and KoP forces, every citizen of Barnstaple would still be living in fear!

There is only one punishment deserving of the crime he broke, he must be hanged, until dead. This is the only option.

Prosecution will also prove that is not the first time this man has been convicted of treason!

Law being broke:
hapter 6 - Treason

attempting to remove any office holder, by revolt or rebellion or,
giving privileged information to those who are likely to use it against the interest of town, county or kingdom or,
opposing official Cornwell county force anywhere or the force of our allies or,
willfully increasing the vunerabilty of a town or the county
The maximum penalty is 5 days and 5000 pound fine plus any profit from such an action for a first offence and death for a subsequent one.

To the defendant:
You have the right to call a lawyer. You can ask for a lawyer at this address:
http://www.acilion.com/englishforum/viewtopic.php?t=12859

First defence pleading wrote:
Your Honor, ladies and gentlemen from the Jury. Let me explain you that this case has no reason to be done.

First : Could I see the evidence you are talking about ? Do you have any proof that I was behind the plan to overtake Barnstaple ?
Thinking that we just changed our name without changing our tactic is only SUPPOSITION ! I'm the victim of my bad reputation.

Second : Is there anything in the Cornwall laws that say that RP can have consequences in-game ? NO ! I checked them out and didn't find. All you have against me are few posts in the Barnstaple Hall. You should be clear with yourself. If RP can have consequences in-game, then you should prosecute many more people !

Third : There's a contradiction in the bill of indictment. The law says : "The maximum penalty is 5 days and 5000 pound fine plus any profit from such an action for a first offence and death for a subsequent one."
and the Prosecutor ask for the Death penalty !!
There was no previous trial against me for this accusation. You should consider it as a first offense.

Fourth : I did not harm Barnstaple in any way, the new mayor could provide you the proof that I didn't sell or buy anything to the Town Hall in order to make any profit.

Fifth : I consider this trial as a political manoeuver ! I'm disturbing the Council by my will of freedom. All I did was asking for the independance of the County of Barnshire. Isn't there a freedom of speech in this Country ??

Prosecutor indictment wrote:
The defendant didn't present to the Court.

Last defence pleading wrote:
Should I conclude seeing you speechless, that you didn't find any arguments to counter mine ??
OK, I saw the Count's post about that.
But I don't believe the law does apply in this case. and my lawyer Drrino will prove this.

The actions in Barnstaple fro, the Wolves of Sherwood, as a whole, were done for the betterment of the town, as you still didn't produce any evidence of my involvment, I suggest the Judge to dismiss the case.
I would like to remind the honourable Judge that nothing was stolen, and that the new mayor tried to calm the people, and was active in the TH.

Drrino (called by the defence) wrote:
Your honor.
The denfedant admits that he is the leader of the Sherwood Wolves, the organisation that was in control of Barnstaple, prior to the revolt of Kysmylif.
However, there are a few details that the PP failed to reveal in this matter, and that make the actions of the defendant outside the confines of the TREASON law, as quoted in by the PP.
I quote from the Bill of indictment:
"The defendant was behind the plan to overtake the town of Barnstaple!"
"Dark Devil is an infamous career criminal, and the leader of the heinous organization known as the Hell's Masters! They have changed their name to The Wolves of Sherwood, but their tactics have not changed."
These are not excatly true.

The Plan to overtake the town of Barnstaple was not Dark_devil's. It was originally a plan from the Council. The council of Cornwall intended to hold a revolt, and install ANTO Capone as mayor of Barnstaple.
Further, I quote from the Treason Law (as Found in The Bill of Indictment):
"attempting to remove any office holder, by revolt or rebellion"
The actions in question were not an atempt to remove ANY person who holds an office. Urshak did not ATEMPT to remove anyone from office, as the attempt was that the County of Cornwall. The mayor of Barnstaple would have been removed from office in either case, which is what the law prohibits.
Further more, the Defendant did not atempt to remove anyone from office, for the same reasons.
Further more, If this court believes that the actions of some to gain the mayoralty of Barnstaple ARE a treasonous act, there is no concrete proof that the Defendant in this case took part in it, FOR REASONS of personal gain, or the personal gain of his friends.
Further more, I quote from the Treason Law:
"The county may grant wavers to any of the above action in advance"
AS it was the County who organised this rebellion, I am going to assume that the County observed due process in issuing these Wavers.
However, that would only make the "Treasonous" acts legal, in this case the 2nd and 5th cluases of the Law. These clauses are the (previously qouted) removing of an office holder, and "willfully increasing the vunerabilty of a town or the county".
If the county did grant the wavers, then the actions are legal. If the County did not grant the waver, the I respectfully request that the court inquire into the roles of the (Former) Countess, Sargent and Captian in these acts of treason.
Finally, the PP has not yet presented proof that the Defendant took part, or "Willfully aided" in treasonous acts, nor it there proof that anyone (The denfandant or any other person) used the mayors office against the town of Barnstaple.

As for the sencond part of the Bill of indictment, I would suggest that it is factually incorrect.
Dark_Devil is not a member of the Hell's Masters, as such an organisation doesn't exist. While he was a member of that group, it has since disbanded, and therefore he cannot be a member.
Also, the Hell's Masters is not the same as the Sherwood Wolves. While some of the members are the same, it is a new group, with new members and new goals.
The Hell's masters were a criminal orgainisation, the Sherwood Wolves are a group of volonteers who are trying to help the poor.
Further, this is not relevent to the case at hand.
As proof of the fact that Dark_Devil has reformed, and that the Sherwood wolves are NOT the Hells Masters, I would like to offer the following.
'I am the Hound leader of the Wolves of Sherwood,
"we steal from the rich, give to the needy and keep some for ourselves".'
This is the defendants own desription of himself, and his organisation.
A year ago, Dark_Devil gave a description of himself and the (Former) group called Hell's Masters. It can be found at:http://www.acilion.com/englishforum/viewtopic.php?p=14920&highlight=hells+masters#14920:
I found that these descriptions are quite different, and show a different sytle between the two groups.

As for the evidence offered by the new PP, I find it woe-fully lacking.
First, the PP promised us "Prosecution will also prove that is not the first time this man has been convicted of treason!".
Where is that proof? I have seen no such proof. While I would not ignore the past, I would suggest that the PP needs to follow up on the promises made by that office, and that the prior actions of Dark_Devil are not relevant. I will return to this in a moment.
Also, the second piece is not relevant to this matter. This case is about the possiblility that the revolt in Barnstaple was treasonous, and that Dark Devil was involved in this revolt. THe other action of my client are not in question in this case.
Finally, I am unable to read the other piece of evidence offered. It is tiny, and when enlarged looses all clairity.

Your Honor, I request that this case be dismissed, with no leave to reopen. The PP did not observe due process.
Also, the PP has not offered proof that the act was treasonous, and that Dark Devil was involved.
Finally, and most importantly, the law does not apply in this case. Even if the law did apply, there is not proof that the defendant did anything wrong.
I trust that justice will be served in this case, and that the defendant will be found not guilty.
Thank you

Dame_Vaness (called by the prosecutor) wrote:
Here is a proof that you worked in association with Urshak, the rebel who took the town:
https://2img.net/h/i65.photobucket.com/albums/h210/methosrk/HM.jpg

It's notorious that you are a dangerous criminal.
You are not the victim of your bad reputation, you DO have a bad reputation and it seems you are proud of it !
Moreover, you find pleasure in provocation:
https://redcdn.net/ihimizer/img258/5851/fornogwa7lg.jpg
This evidence shows that you were attempting to rob people, luckily, noone was hurt at this moment.

You maybe didn't hurt the town of Barnstaple, but by claiming its independance, you went against the unity of our County and this is considered as High Treason !
For this reason and because you are an eternal repeat offender, the prosecution requires a heavy verdict ! The heaviest !

Sentence wrote:
Statement of accusation
The defendant has been proved guilty of traitorousness.
Due to the new proofs brought by the prosecutor this court finds you guilty in the case of Dark_devil vs Cornwall. You receive 2 days in jail, 2 months interdiction to enter Barnstaple and a symbolic fine of 1 pound
The defendant has been sentenced to prison penalty 2 days et 1 pound fine.

_________________
"An idea not coupled with action will never get any bigger than the brain cell it occupied."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
[Traitorousness] Dark_devil vs Cornwall - Guilty
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Archives of England :: Cornwall County-
Jump to: