HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log inLog in  

Share | 

 [Treason] Urshak vs. Cornwall - Discharged

Go down 
Dr. Rino

Number of posts : 59
Registration date : 2007-01-08

PostSubject: [Treason] Urshak vs. Cornwall - Discharged   Tue 30 Jan - 15:51

Lawsuit between Urshak and Cornwall

Urshak was charged with commission of betrayal.

The sentence has been passed
Statement of accusation

The defendant has been discharged.
While this case is of a complex nature, the overriding will of the Regent takes precedence here. His will is that this case be dismissed. Thus, the Court of Cornwall bends to his will and rules as Not Guilty.

Bill of indictment

Sir Urshak you are accused of High Treason.
You took possession of a Cornish territory (the road from Barnstaple to Bridgewater) with some other Sherwood wolves and declared this road 'Barnshire territory' by establishing here a fort blocking the road.

Extract of the Law:
"TREASON : opposing official Cornwall county force anywhere or the force of our allies or,
willfully increasing the vunerabilty of a town or the county or,
trying to depose the King (RP) or,
willfully aiding others in any of the above. "

You're clearly opposing the County forces asking you to surrender. You're clearly trying to depose the King and his representants by mocking and provocating his Army. You're clearly increasing the vulnerability of the County by reducing the Cornwall domain.

Now face the Cornish Justice for your acts !

First defence pleading
The defendant didn't present to the Court.

Prosecutor indictment
The current regent has declared the WoS criminals in post:http://www.acilion.com/englishforum/viewtopic.php?t=17203&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
where he states "We Decree there shall be no quarter, no mercy, and no passage for any of the Wolves of Sherwood. All those under the banner of the Wolves of Sherwood shall be put to death. All those speaking support of thier ideals and designs shall be held to account for treason. There shalt not be any quarter given. We hence forth declare that no surender shalt be accepted from any one raising arms against Loyal forces for the duration of this action."

He also writes: "Hense forth all of the Wolves of Sherwood are branded criminal and traitor to the Kingdom by decree of the Throne of England."

Since the defendent does not dispute any of the facts or the harm he caused, and as the Regent, speaking for the King, does not recognise the county of Barnshire, and as you have been informed of the Regents decision and choose to continue your offenses anyways. It is clear that you are guilty of High Treason

Last defence pleading
Your Honour,

The defence my lawyer, DrRino, wrote should be more then clear. I also want to thank Lord Anto_Capone for his words that he has spoken to help me. Considering that all that could be said here, has been said I have only one more thing to add myself... I recommand to the Judge who is going to pass on the sentence in my case, has a meeting with HRH Prince John before doing so.

I thank you for your attention,

Sir UrShak Winston

The defence called Drrino
His statement:
Your Honour,
I wish to be brief,
The Bill of Indictment says:
"You're clearly increasing the vulnerability of the County by reducing the Cornwall domain."
I ask the court who actually reduced the Cornish Domain? As has been brought to this Courts attention before, the land was GIVEN to the WoS by Her Majasty, The Royal Regent Nordicnorn, as is Her Royal Right as Regent.
I know that after her death, the next regent proclaimed the WoS to be traitors. However, he never gave back the lands of Barnshire to Cornwall.
Infact, it was the orders of the Regent, and the council, to attack Barnshire that placed this county at greater peril. The CRG had fewer troops to defend the towns, and therefore put them at risk.
I do not ask that anyone be tried for this, as it is the enevitable reaction, and no bad come of the increased peril.

Your Honour, nobody denies the actions of the defendant. However, they were legal as per Barnshire Law. The Regent gave the lands to WoS, and to Dark_Devil. These citizens of Barnshire created a law book, and the actions in question do not fall within the laws in the County of Barnshire.

Your Hounor, it was not the defendant and his friends who were deposing of the authority of the Regent, but rather they were enforcing it, and defending the lands given to them by the Regent.
Your Honour, I ask that you hold-up the will of the Late Royal Regent, Lady Nordicnorn, and dismiss the case. She put her seal to the papers that gave the lands to The WoS, and we should respect that, regardless as to our opinions of WOS.
The matter of being a member of WoS is not for this court to deside, in this Court case.

The defence called Anto_capone
His statement:
*Anto approaches the bench, and pulls out some scribbled notes from his pocket. Clearing his throat, he proceeds with his testimony:*
I can only speak on my own accord, not that of the Regent Prince Dugustus, the CRG, or the defendant Urshak.
While Urshak did participate in a blockade of Cornish territories, I believe his defeat at our hands has opened his eyes to a willingness to reason.
Urshak's correspondence with the Regent has truly touched upon my heart, and as I may be more forgiving than most, I appeal to this Court to give this some thought:
Urshak wrote: "I have failed to serve my King, but never have I intended to harm the people. From this day forth I will once more serve King and County.

Thee have good judgement, thee have good sense; If thee find my words to be quite empty than … If you wish me to cry, I will cry… I will do whatever you want me to… O what an unlucky fool I am then! Nothing is worth that effort as I am a respectable head of a household!"

I believe Urshak will be paying a far greater price than he or anyone anticipated for his acts. He was already wounded, and already lost a good share of his monies, I humbly request this Court to be lenient on this man so as he can once again become a prominent contributor to society.
Perhaps the good judge of this Court can order Urshak to pay his brother, the Priest of Barnstaple Dragothar, his stolen monies back as a fair restitution for Urshak's crime?

*With a deep sincerity written upon the face of Anto, he bows to the Court and takes his leave, thanking the Court for its time.*

The prosecutor called Shewolf
His statement:
Urshak is a confirmed member of the wolves of Sherwood, and as such, he willfully aided in resisting the Cornwall Redcoat Guard, and our officials. He participated in the blockade of our road, and of which this road was a vital trade route, making his blockade all the more severe. The wolves of Sherwood took our road, and claimed it, as well as one of our towns, "Barnshire". His actions willfully mocked both the cornwall army, and the cornwall council.

It is my Opinion that these actions, Severely increased the vulnerability of cornwall, and its towns. The CRG had to shift recources to this area, leaving other towns more vulnerable.

I ask that this should be considered when rendering his verdict.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
[Treason] Urshak vs. Cornwall - Discharged
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: