| Legal Question (interpret the meaning and application of a law) [1905|1906] Islands of Unity v. Roavin | Withholding Evidence and Contempt of Court |
Your honors I believe that Roavin has committed the crime of contempt of court by not disclosing his findings of evidence of bribery in the nakari v north praire case. As mentioned in the complaint filing in the aformentioned case, and shown in the attachments below roavin withheld evidence that was used later in an indictment issued by the court against north praire, that evidence having to do with his attempts to bribe concrete slab.
My legal questions here are as follows: 1. Has Roavin commited contempt of court by not supplying the evidence? 2. If evidence is withheld by a legislator that later leads to an indictment in a crimminal case, has that legislator committed contempt of court? 3. Should legislators be made to disclose any evidence of crimminal activity in the region that they come accross? 4. If question 2 is awnsered in the affirmative, what timeline should disclosure of crimminal activity follow? Thank you your honors
Your honor,
I realize that you have not yet determined justiciability, but if it pleases, I will tackle this head on since it's an easy one. Even if the described scenario were to constitute contempt (which is very strenuous), clearly the plaintiff's evidence shows that there was an intent to file. ![[Image: XXPV74Y.png?1]](https://i.imgur.com/XXPV74Y.png?1)
Your honor
I would like to point out that it is unlikely that roavin would have filed during the election as this came forward on the second day of elections, that it is unlikely that cs would have granted permission, and that nakari believed that roavin's intent was to avoid filing thank you (02-17-2019, 08:18 PM)islands_of_unity Wrote: Your honor For the record - I believed that Roavin's intent was to convince Concrete Slab to give permission to disclose the logs, and that he was attempting to get that permission in order to file. I didn't think he wanted to avoid filing at all. I did, however, think that waiting to get the permission of someone you're about to accuse of a crime was a serious misjudgement, and that this needed to be brought to public attention before the elections were over.
![[Image: BYEo2lg.png]](https://i.imgur.com/BYEo2lg.png) Finding of Probable Cause Whereas Islands of Unity has requested this Court to indict Roavin through the following request:
Has Roavin commited contempt of court by not supplying the evidence?
Whereas this Court is empowered by Article V, Section 1 of the Judicial Act to indict individuals when it finds probable cause that they may have committed a crime, as codified in the Criminal Code.
It is resolved with respect to this Review Request as follows:
It is so ordered. Kris Kringle Chief Justice Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
![[-]](https://tspforums.xyz/images/sidr/blue/collapse.png)
The following 3 users Like Imperial Frost Federation's post:• islands_of_unity, New Haudenosaunee Confederacy, Ryccia
I would like to ask the court for a determination opinion, specifically foucusing on what does and doesn't qualify as contempt of court, and if possible any answers for the other legal questions submitted.
Thank you your honor
Contempt of Court, under the definition considered by the Court, is any behaviour that constitutes a deliberate perversion of the justice system. That is, conduct which prevents the judiciary from reaching a true and just result.
As was said elsewhere, the Court will consider the justiciability of your other questions will all due haste. Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
Determination of Justiciability Whereas Islands of Unity has requested this Court that a review be conducted on certain issues related to the interpretation of the law with the following questions:
If evidence is withheld by a legislator that later leads to an indictment in a crimminal case, has that legislator committed contempt of court?
Should legislators be made to disclose any evidence of crimminal activity in the region that they come accross? If question 2 is awnsered in the affirmative, what timeline should disclosure of crimminal activity follow? Whereas this Court has conducted a careful review of the merits of such a request on the basis of its legal necessity and potential to impact present and future policies.
It is resolved with respect to these Legal Questions as follows:
Kris Kringle Chief Justice Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
The following 5 users Like Kris Kringle's post:• Beepee, Bzerneleg, New Haudenosaunee Confederacy, Poppy, Volaworand |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
fixed| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |