Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tawa]

"Thank you, but we already have one. The poor fellow's been denied the chance far too many times; he deserves this."

[endlessblaze]

"very well."

[IcyTea31]

Exhibit A
"First, it can be seen that the defendant is a huge fan of '[dubious - discuss]'. This is an extremely weak Wikipedia footnote and using it in this manner is punishable by law."

"The footnote was used correctly on its first use in the exhibit. However, for the rest: [dubious] cannot, in fact, be used along with [citation needed], as it is only to be used on sourced claims. [citation needed] supersedes it in the format, leaving it invisible on any properly coded medium."

"It would appear this Court isn't properly coded."

Exhibit B
"The defendant has failed to engage in adequate legal action when the opportunity presented itself. Suing the GM for inactivity would not only have provided an incentive to keep the thread moving, but also to make an actual case instead of goofy original shenanigans."

"That is entrapment. In the GM's absence, suing any entity is impossible. My client can't be held responsible for failing to perform the impossible."

Exhibit C
"Additionally, the defendant has not only slacked off and read Sherlock Holmes stories in the middle of a trial, but also edits his own posts without marking what has been edited! Who knows what mischief could be behind that metaphorical wall?"

"My client was merely making sure the witness was who they claimed to be. Reading material related to an individual's dossier is encouraged, not illegal. As for the edit, minor edits such as correcting spelling are allowed to be performed unannounced. Does the prosecution have any evidence of the edit not being an example of this?"

Exhibit D
"Finally, the defendant has tried to apply real-world law to a courtroom where film characters are tried for violating the laws of physics. Another instance of his dreaded editing can also be observed here."

"Your exhibit does not show my client attempting to apply the law, only him acknowledging its existence in the real world."

"As for the other defendant, BadLemonsXI, the charges are much more clear-cut."

Exhibit D
"The defendant is believed to possess an unlawful space fleet and waging unlawful multiversal warfare. They will therefore be tried for this charge under the Generic Conventions."

"The Generic Conventions do not forbid the use of genetically modified insects, or 'space fleas' as they're sometimes called, in war. No part of the exhibit implies a multiversal presence, as 'worlds' simply means 'planets'."

Exhibit E
"The defendant is also seen to be capable of popping up wherever they wish in the courthouse. This is clear evidence that they possess some unlawful power over the court."

"Considering my client is a judge of this Court, it should come as no surprise that he is in possession of a key to the front door. Hiding under the benches is a trivial matter. Who is to say he didn't wait for hours in there, waiting for the perfect moment to stand up?"

Exhibit F
"Finally, the defendant can be seen to dislike the creation of order in a court of law. This is despite his status as a judge! The implications of this are numerous."

"Free speech."


"In conclusion, the prosecution feels that there is more than adequate suspicion that the defendants have engaged in unlawful practices here. The prosecution seeks to expose this and amend the Constitution of the Thread in order to more properly represent the interests of the Court and the People."

"Should the prosecution win in this case, the prosecution requests a sanctioned edit of the Original Post, so that the Constitution of the Thread may be amended such that the ridiculous shenanigans that have taken place in this court for far too long may come to an end. Subsequently, the court will be for the explicit purpose of litigation between forum members in the 'r/KarmaCourt' model, but while maintaining our own personal flair and the extensive use of image editing."

"Matters such as that should be handled outside the Court." ((i.e. out of character))

"Does the defense find endlessblaze to be an acceptable judge?"

"Yes."

"he deserves this."

"No, I don't."

https://www.federalrulesofcriminalprocedure.org

"Ah, you're American? Sorry, we follow Japanifornian law around here."

[TheBiggerFish]

"Perhaps we should raise an objection to three defendants with widely varying alleged crimes being tried in the same case, Counselor?

Ahem.

Additionally, nowhere in the laws regarding this court is any proclamation regarding editing, and even were such to be promulgated immediately, ex post facto laws are impermissible."

"The Defense shall now read the Rules of the Court into the record."

Rules of the Court
1. All lawsuits filed must be lighthearted or in jest. If you have a serious issue with another poster, bring it up with Toady, not a forum game. Semi-serious debates, such as the debate over Pathos's omnipresence in Turnabout Pathos, are allowed, but make sure that you're not offending anybody.
2. If you would like to initiate a lawsuit or file charges, bring it up with me. If you would like assistance prosecuting or defending your case, feel free to ask for an attorney.
3. Colored text and talk sprites are expected and encouraged but not mandatory. Your avatar is assumed to be your representation in the court unless otherwise notified and will be used in official court images^TM unless an alternative representation is requested.
4. Not a rule, per se, but a reminder: civil cases are suing people over perceived wrongs and generally end in a rewarding of money or court orders. Criminal cases are ones about crime and generally end in punishment if a guilty verdict is found. You can sue people over criminal charges as damages, but the criminal case comes first.
5. Avoid derailing too far. It's alright if you diverge from the courtroom shenanigans for a short while, but avoid pestering the court with unrelated material for extended periods of time.
6. Depending on the circumstances, the trial may be based on actual logic, insane troll logic, or various courtroom antics. Don't be surprised if you are claimed innocent based on the fact that aliens don't wear hats.
7. Defendants may defend themselves or ask a bystander for help as an attorney. Plaintiffs and prospective prosecutors may prosecute for themselves or request a court official's help.
8. Cross-examination rules: Either side may call a witness. Prosecution gets first pick on eyewitnesses. The attorney calling the witness is assumed to have prepared the witness for the trial and may give the witness dialogue and testimony as they see fit. The other side may ask questions and present evidence to the witnesses. Your primary goal during the cross-examination is to expose a lie or falsehood in the witness's testimony, either to discredit their testimony or elucidate the truth. Remember: if you call the witness, you can provide the testimony, but the further the testimony is from the truth, the more easily the lie can be exposed. Calling witnesses who give only inconsequential testimony or repeatedly tell obvious falsehoods will earn you a penalty.
9. By playing this game, you hereby pledge your soul to be used freely by Tawarochir.[/center]

Spoiler: Disclaimer (click to show/hide)

I used some fansprites in a couple of cases. If you're the one who made them and you want them out just let me know.

"...HEY WAIT A MINUTE!  There is invisible text in this document!"

"9. By playing this game, you hereby pledge your soul to be used freely by Tawarochir."

"I do believe we have the makings of a civil suit over the unenforceability of a portion of these rules...  That is not what I intended to agree to!"

[Tawa]

"The footnote was used correctly on its first use in the exhibit. However, for the rest: [dubious] cannot, in fact, be used along with [citation needed], as it is only to be used on sourced claims. [citation needed] supersedes it in the format, leaving it invisible on any properly coded medium."

"It would appear this Court isn't properly coded."

"Using it incorrectly is even more illegal!"

"That is entrapment. In the GM's absence, suing any entity is impossible. My client can't be held responsible for failing to perform the impossible."

"The defence concedes that currently, trials cannot be held without the GM's presence."

"However, he could have made a motion to try the GM upon his return!"

"My client was merely making sure the witness was who they claimed to be. Reading material related to an individual's dossier is encouraged, not illegal. As for the edit, minor edits such as correcting spelling are allowed to be performed unannounced. Does the prosecution have any evidence of the edit not being an example of this?"

"...You may strike Exhibit C from the record."

"Your exhibit does not show my client attempting to apply the law, only him acknowledging its existence in the real world."

"Very well, the defendant is not trying to apply a law. But he is pointing out that real-world law does not contain such a rule, which is irrelevant to the rules of this court."

"The Generic Conventions do not forbid the use of genetically modified insects, or 'space fleas' as they're sometimes called, in war. No part of the exhibit implies a multiversal presence, as 'worlds' simply means 'planets'."

"Considering my client is a judge of this Court, it should come as no surprise that he is in possession of a key to the front door. Hiding under the benches is a trivial matter. Who is to say he didn't wait for hours in there, waiting for the perfect moment to stand up?"

"Free speech."

"Admittedly, these exhibits are mostly cause for suspicion, rather than any concrete proof. Ergo, the prosecution motions to call the defendant as a witness, in order to prove or disprove their motives and intents with these statements."

"Matters such as that should be handled outside the Court." ((i.e. out of character))

"The prosecution admits this. As such, the prosecution motions for a change of plans: the prosecution suggests reforming the Original Post into a comprehensive law code, then trying the defendants. As it stands, the Original Post is a haphazard mess."

"No, I don't."

"Of course you do! You are a brilliant debater. It is an honor to face you in court."

"...HEY WAIT A MINUTE!  There is invisible text in this document!"

"9. By playing this game, you hereby pledge your soul to be used freely by Tawarochir."

"I do believe we have the makings of a civil suit over the unenforceability of a portion of these rules...  That is not what I intended to agree to!"

"What in blazes?!"


"...The prosecution believes that this law was an attempt to sell the defendant's soul in a forum game."


"That incident from 10 months ago has come back to haunt us... the VN-12 Incident!"

Spoiler: 「 VN-12: Shadow Over the Academy 」 (click to show/hide)

Boarding School ~ Unerasable Past
"Those were different days."

"It began so innocently: the GM attended a school, hoping to make friends and love interests."

"The law was different then. It was taught in schools, and had only begun its slow descent."

"But dark forces conspired to corrupt the GM."

"A great power appeared, and all disappeared into the darkness."

"This incident was crucial in the corruption of the court! Shortly afterward, the case against Pumaman occurred, and with it, the true Dark Age of the Thread was ushered in."

[IcyTea31]

"Using it incorrectly is even more illegal!"

"Ah, but my client only used it once, correctly! The other times, my client didn't use it, as it was superseded by [citation needed]."

"The defence concedes that currently, trials cannot be held without the GM's presence."
"However, he could have made a motion to try the GM upon his return!"

"I still believe this to be entrapment. Exactly fifty-six minutes and twenty seconds passed between Mr. Gwolfski's suggestion to sue the GM. This being less than an hour, raises a suspicion:"

"Did Mr. Gwolfski purposefully suggest suing the GM to take advantage of my client's agitated state and cause him to commit a crime?"

"Also, you are the prosecution, not the defence."

"...You may strike Exhibit C from the record."

"Speaking of which, where is the court record for this case?"

"Very well, the defendant is not trying to apply a law. But he is pointing out that real-world law does not contain such a rule, which is irrelevant to the rules of this court."

"You said it: irrelevant. No crime was committed."

"Admittedly, these exhibits are mostly cause for suspicion, rather than any concrete proof."

"But didn't you say...?"

Spoiler: Flashback! (click to show/hide)

"As for the other defendant, BadLemonsXI, the charges are much more clear-cut."

"You seem to have contradicted yourself."

"Ergo, the prosecution motions to call the defendant as a witness, in order to prove or disprove their motives and intents with these statements."

"Very well. Mr. Lemons, if you would...?"

"The prosecution admits this. As such, the prosecution motions for a change of plans: the prosecution suggests reforming the Original Post into a comprehensive law code, then trying the defendants. As it stands, the Original Post is a haphazard mess."

"I see no reason not to do that as soon as possible."

"9. By playing this game, you hereby pledge your soul to be used freely by Tawarochir."

"What in blazes?!"

"Wait, what!?"

"Oh well, I never had a soul to begin with, so no skin off my back. Ah, the life of an inanimate object."

[BadLemonsXI]

(( Its late. . . So image's and stuff up tomorrow. . .   ))

[endlessblaze]

-sits back, observeing the trial.-

[TheBiggerFish]

"Admittedly, these exhibits are mostly cause for suspicion, rather than any concrete proof. Ergo, the prosecution motions to call the defendant as a witness, in order to prove or disprove their motives and intents with these statements."

"Mere suspicion is not grounds for a trial!  There must be actual evidence!  If the prosecution cannot produce such, I move for summary dismissal of all charges!"

[IcyTea31]

"Mere suspicion is not grounds for a trial!  There must be actual evidence!

"Japanifornia. Just go with it."

[BadLemonsXI]

"Sure I'll go to the stand. . "
"Like fuck you will."
"What the fuck happened?"
"I didn't do anything and you know it."


"I'll take over from here."

[Gwolfski]

"This court is getting too much salt. People either go all sour like acid or trying to go too basic. Why can't we be neutral and revise this in a calm and prudent manner? Nobody has been sentenced for months!_{Pardon my little science joke, it might've been tasteless.}"

[IcyTea31]

"I'll take over from here."

"Go ahead. You probably know better what's actually going on with the lemon gummint...wait a minute."

"Doesn't Mr. Lemons have diplomatic immunity?"

[TheBiggerFish]

"Mere suspicion is not grounds for a trial!  There must be actual evidence!

"Japanifornia. Just go with it."

"I don't think Japanifornian law says you can try someone without any evidence at all, and the prosecution has admitted they have none!"

[Tawa]

"Before these charges are addressed, the prosecution has finished drafting up the New Constitution of the Court. If the court would please read it, and if five members could vote 'yea' or 'nay' on the new Constitution, we may get on with the trial in its proper format."

Spoiler: Draft: The New Constitution (click to show/hide)

Article the First:

All People of Bay12 are subject to the higher Law of the Forum Guidelines. Any violation of the Guidelines is to be tried not in this Court, but under the watchful Eye of Toady One. Additionally, all Trials are to be held Civilly, in accordance with these Guidelines.


Article the Second:

The People of Bay12 are Entitled to the following five Rights:
   > Freedom from Insults and Name Calling;
   > Freedom from Lying and Defamation;
   > Freedom from Violence, Real or Imaginary;
   > Freedom from Plagiarism, Unsanctioned Copying, and other Forms of Theft;
   > Freedom to Practice any Art or Skill, so long as they possess the requisite Licenses;


Article the Third:

The Trials of the Bay12 Court are not to be in any way Serious, Salty, or Personal; they are only to be Silly, Sensational, and Pretty Funny. Although Members may file cases for events that Actually Happened, do not take the charges Seriously. If you are aware that the Charges will lead to Serious or Salty discussion, do not file them with this Court. If any case becomes Serious, Salty, or Personal, the Thread Creator reserves the right to halt proceedings via thread-locking.


Article the Fourth:

All trials shall be held with a Judge, a Prosecutor, and a Defense Attorney. Any Member determined to be Impartial may be a Judge, and any Member may be a Prosecutor or a Defense Attorney. Defendants and Plaintiffs may choose to represent themselves. Juries may be used if approved by the Judge. The Judge will begin the Trial, determine when to stop the Trial, and will deliver the Verdict in the absence of Jurors.


Article the Fifth:

Penalties are to be assigned to Attorneys or other Members of the Court for Misconduct. The Trial shall end Immediately if a Defense Attorney, Prosecutor, or Judge receives ten Penalties.


Article the Sixth:

Any Defense Attorney or Prosecutor may call a Witness. Any compliant Member of the Forum may be called as a witness. They are to provide their Testimony in Lime Green text as directed by the Member who calls them.


Article the Seventh:

The use of Images, though not Mandatory, is Encouraged and Expected. Anything from a Talk Sprite representing You in the Court to animated GIFs of Your actions is acceptable.


Article the Eighth:

All Cruel and Unusual Punishments are hereby banned. Plaintiffs may exclusively sue for Outrageous Fines and Cool and Unusual Punishments. Participants in this forum game will, by no means, have their souls confiscated without due process.


Article the Ninth:

This document will not be accepted as Law unless ratified by at least Five Members of the Forum, discounting its Drafter.


Article the Tenth:

Should any part of this Document be found Inadequate, a One-Day Referendum for an Amendment will be held. Should a majority of the voters find the Amendment suitable, the Amendment will be added to the Constitution of the Court.

"Mere suspicion is not grounds for a trial!  There must be actual evidence!

"Japanifornia. Just go with it."

"I don't think Japanifornian law says you can try someone without any evidence at all, and the prosecution has admitted they have none!"

"One of my coworkers once prosecuted a blind child on suspicion of shooting a tall, muscular police agent three times with a .45-calibre revolver, and another prosecuted a woman on the evidence that her boyfriend, after breaking his neck, wrote her name in the sand. I think that admissions from the defendant such as I have cited constitute 'probable cause'."