+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Judicial District (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-49.html)
+------ Forum: Conference Room (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-272.html)
+------ Thread: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich (/thread-9060.html)
[2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Kris Kringle - 12-31-2020
|
HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2015.HC] LEGISLATOR COMMITTEE V. SCHWEIZER REICH SUBMISSION 31 DECEMBER 2020 DOCKET FILE NUMBER 2015.HC REFERENCE NAME Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich SUBMITTER Legislator Committee CHARGE Identity Fraud CASE LINK https://tspforums.xyz/thread-9059.html DETERMINATION OF JUSTICIABILITY - DISCUSSION OPEN TO ALL JUSTICES
DELIBERATION RESTRICTED TO CHIEF JUSTICE KRINGLE (PRESIDING) AND JUSTICE GRIFFINDOR (SECONDARY) |
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Nat - 12-31-2020
I think that if Roavin can provide evidence (confidentially if necessary) that one of the IP addresses were the same then there would be probable cause. I would prefer that rather than just relying on Roavin's word (even though I think he is a very trustworthy guy, the current evidence is that the government says they have evidence). Can we please ask Roavin to provide the IP evidence, even just confidentially to Kris?
The other question to resolve is whether this should delay the sentencing case in [2012.HC]. I don't think it should. Shangyuen was convicted of failing to comply with a Court order. Consequently, I don't see how him misrepresenting his identity to another branch of government impacts the assessment of his conviction. If the Court is satisfied, I would prefer if [2012.HC] proceeded as scheduled, with a final sentence to be released in 3-4 days.
As always, I am open to further discussion on both of these points.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Griffindor - 12-31-2020
Since we don't have a verdict on whether or not this new account actually is Shangyuen, it looks to be the case. Still, without a conviction for identity fraud, we don't know for sure and, as such, can't assume they are related until it is proven "substantially more likely than not" in a trial.
The best way to proceed would be to accept the case (which probable cause exists) and proceed as a normal trial. If convicted, tie the accounts together into a lumpsum conviction (this mostly replies to Nat's question here: https://tspforums.xyz/thread-9000-post-212629.html#pid212629 ). Though, I will agree with Nat that the Court would need to confirm the IP addresses for the sake of due diligence.
If the other justices agree to take on the case, I would be open to being presiding or secondary justice. Since Nat and I have taken/finished the related case, I think it might be best to keep us on this case, too (assuming Nat agrees
).
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Nat - 01-01-2021
After some reconsideration, I am happy to delay Shangyuen's sentencing on Contempt of Court in order to facilitate joint sentencing which lists his aliases so the ban covers them also. However, I think Philippinia's sentencing should go ahead as planned.
If the Court is satisfied, I am happy to work with Griffindor again on this one either as presiding or secondary.
Nonetheless as stated before, I would like Roavin to pass on the IP evidence as soon as possible. I am wary of indicting at the moment because we all we have is Roavin saying that he has evidence.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Kris Kringle - 01-02-2021
I will request that Roavin provide more substantial evidence of the claim of identity fraud, and if we determine there is probable cause I'd have no issue with Nat and Griffindor taking the case.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Nat - 01-03-2021
If the Court agrees to have Roavin only provide the Chief Justice with the evidence related to this case (which is a reasonable position to take), I would prefer to not be assigned to this case as either the presiding or secondary. This is because I am wary of convicting someone based on evidence I do not have access to (even though independent verification can come via the Chief Justice). I apologise for this change from my earlier position on taking this case. In any case, I still feel I am capable of discussing probable cause.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Kris Kringle - 01-04-2021
Right now we are only considering probable cause. If such is found, then I’m sure we’ll find a way to properly handle the case.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Nat - 01-05-2021
Could the Chief Justice please confirm that he has received evidence from Roavin via Discord? If so, do one or more of the IP addresses match between Shangyuen and Schweizer Reich? (I don't care much for the other evidence Roavin described)
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Kris Kringle - 01-05-2021
Apologies for the delay, life has been a bit hectic recently. I can confirm that Roavin has indeed sent me the evidence that was considered by the Legislator Committee in the matter of Shangyuen and Schweizer Reich. The evidence has been obtained from tools available to LegComm and also to Forum Admins. Based on this evidence, which I have also double-checked in my own capacity as Forum Admin, Shangyuen and Schweizer Reich do share at least one IP address.
RE: [2015.HC] Legislator Committee v. Schweizer Reich - Griffindor - 01-05-2021
Since you have confirmed what Roavin has said, then we have probable cause and can proceed with taking the case, including the designation of presiding and secondary justice.