The System of Justice

[Archer he/him]

Quote

This has the feel of having been orchestrated in advance. Either that, or Mac realized he couldn't win and just gave up.

 

[Kidpen he/him]

Quote

Mac is bored of being unbiased.

 

[Gancho Libre he/him]

Quote

Yup. most of this was deciced in discord.

 

[Mistspren she/her]

Quote

You have to say it in world, so I can reply and give the sentence. I will not carry out the execution, so someone else will have to do it.

 

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

Quote

Mac is pretty cool but I would be more than happy to kill him 

 

[+ElephantEarwax he/him]

 Don'k kill Mac. He has a family. 6 children. *chorus of weeping in the background*

[Gancho Libre he/him]

Quote

I did. see the third post. you give the scentance.

 

[MacThorstenson he/him]

Quote

I’m at the Celtics right now, keeping up with the thread is difficult,

but I like how no one is saying I can’t be unbiased any more for a new character, or suggesting that unbiased actually say oaths instead of it just happening. I never actually broke any rules, I never agreed to any contract or said any oaths, I just called myself unbiased and y’all went along with it. 

Also, I pride myself on the fact that I never once lied during my time as a unbiased. (Actually wait, maybe once) Let’s be careful of (a) giving someone this much power, and (b) takes my what they say at face value.

 

Edited April 29, 2018 by MacThorstenson

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

8 minutes ago, MacThorstenson said:

but I like how no one is saying I can’t be unbiased any more for a new character, or suggesting that unbiased actually say oaths instead of it just happening

Quote

The way I see it the power of an unbiased is granted by the inhabitants of the Alleyverse and the way I see time no longer accept you as having any power. You have broken the social contract and we (at least I) entered once again into the war of all against all. Yay 

 

[MacThorstenson he/him]

1 hour ago, The Forgetful Archivist said:

The way I see it the power of an unbiased is granted by the inhabitants of the Alleyverse and the way I see time no longer accept you as having any power. You have broken the social contract and we (at least I) entered once again into the war of all against all. Yay 

Quote

I suppose then that stems from a difference in where the power of an unbiased comes from. I think the power shouldn’t come from the people, because then it could be taken away by the people. What then happens if they have to make an unpopular decision, that the people hate? They need to be able to make that decision. 

[Kidpen he/him]

2 minutes ago, MacThorstenson said:

 

Quote

There is no way to give you power that does not come from the people. If we all ignore you, you have no power.

 

[Mistspren she/her]

"Gancho Libre, having accepted Kidpen's terms, I sentence you to death by aluminum armed firing squad. Furthermore, no future incarnations of MacThorstenson cannot be murdered or in any other way killed by the Ghostbloods without fair reason, including contract and provocation. Any other reasons for death can be manipulated or controlled by the Ghostbloods. If the Ghostbloods break this resolution, another trial or equivalent impartial hearing must occur. The minimum punishment for such an act is death, and the maximum charge death and removal of license to kill in the Alleyverse.  The case is closed." I say, standing after I finish to walk out of the room.

That had gone by incredibly quickly.

Edited April 29, 2018 by Mistspren
Too tired for this...

[Kidpen he/him]

Thank you your honor.

Quote

Gancho, want to invite some people to kill Mac?

 

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

7 minutes ago, Mistspren said:

Any other reasons for death cannot be manipulated or controlled by the Ghostbloods.

what determines provocation?

Edited April 29, 2018 by The Forgetful Archivist

[Mistspren she/her]

Quote

That can either be debated in another trial, or a council of guild members as you suggested. I would define provocation as MacThorstenson attacking one of your members or attempting to kill someone in the GBs. It is essentially a self defense clause, saying you can kill him if he attacks you, so he does not abuse his powers. If another client, with a legitimate reason to kill Mac hires you, other than because of any material this trial settled, then you can also kill him, as stipulated by Kidpen, but that will take more serious review to determine what constructs a legitimate reason, and how separate that is from this trial.

Remember, if you break these rules, we can decide upon a punishment ranging from death to death and revocation of all right to kill in the alleyverse for all characters.

 

[Archer he/him]

I'm going to interpret provocation as an intentional act of aggression or betray against my guild. 

Edit: when you say 'no future incarnations of MacThorstenson cannot be murdered or in any other way killed by the Ghostbloods without fair reason' the double negative means you have to kill him... @Mistspren

Edited April 29, 2018 by Archer

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

Just now, Mistspren said:

That can either be debated in another trial, or a council of guild members as you suggested. I would define provocation as MacThorstenson attacking one of your members or attempting to kill someone in the GBs. It is essentially a self defense clause, saying you can kill him if he attacks you, so he does not abuse his powers. If another client, with a legitimate reason to kill Mac hires you, other than because of any material this trial settled, then you can also kill him, as stipulated by Kidpen, but that will take more serious review to determine what constructs a legitimate reason, and how separate that is from this trial.

Remember, if you break these rules, we can decide upon a punishment ranging from death to death and revocation of all right to kill in the alleyverse for all characters.

I protest, what if the GBs want to kill him to further their own agenda? No one else is immune from us, why should a criminal like Mac get special treatment? Also why dose @Mistspren (a biased member of TUBA) get to make lasting judgements. What gives this court power? Have delgets from all the guilds agreed on rules and regulations like what we did with the rules of war?

 Btw, I know this point is moot because the GBs were disbanded, I am arguing this point because as the first legal case we are making history, we need to make sure that we are setting a good precedent (witch we are not)

[Mistspren she/her]

Sorry, I fixed that. That was a mistake.

I really messed up that trial a lot. Apologies for not better understanding what the plan was or what was going on.

[Archer he/him]

I'll reiterate that mistspren was agreed upon (as judge) by both sides including the gb representative, thus giving him authority over this trial. Unless you have proof he colluded with a party, or evidence of bias, then you have no reason to dispute his authority @The Forgetful Archivist. 

Edited April 29, 2018 by Archer

[Mistspren she/her]

1 minute ago, The Forgetful Archivist said:

I protest, what if the GBs want to kill him to further their own agenda? No one else is immune from us, why should a criminal like Mac get special treatment? Also why dose @Mistspren (a biased member of TUBA) get to make lasting judgements. What gives this court power? Have delgets from all the guilds agreed on rules and regulations like what we did with the rules of war?

 Btw, I know this point is moot because the GBs were disbanded, I am arguing this point because as the first legal case we are making history, we need to make sure that we are setting a good precedent (witch we are not)

The Ghostblood’s own lawyer accepted these terms, and with both sides in agreement, I merely took what they had proposed and used that as the agreed upon sentence. MacThorstenson was killed, but other characters by him are free from unnecessary or vengeance based murders. The GBs could still be hired to kill him, if it was for a sufficient reason, and you can still kill him out of self defence/provocation.

TL;DR blame the lawyers for these terms, they wrote them and agreed upon them.

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

Just now, Archer said:

I'll reiterate that mistspren was agreed upon (as judge) by both sides, thus giving him authority over this trial. Unless you have proof he colluded with a party, or evidence of bias, then you have no reason to dispute his authority @The Forgetful Archivist. 

I am disputing his authority because he claimed to have the power to "revoke of all right to kill in the alleyverse for all characters." But he was never given his power by the guilds of the alleyverse just a few sharders trying to create a legal battle

[Archer he/him]

He was given the power by the gb lawyers. So it at least has authority over Gbs and Mac. 

I suppose if you wanted to formally dispute his authority over other guilds, you could try breaking the rules of the ruling and see how the trial goes for you... The results would be hard to predict. You have a bit of a case. I don't know if it would be enough though. 

He did mention appeals to a higher court. That's another approach, appealing this ruling to the next level

Edited April 29, 2018 by Archer

[The Forgetful Archivist he/him]

I move that this be categorized as a mistrial until we can meet as delgets and create actual legal codes. The fact that we had a trial implies we want order, so I find the idea of a chaotic trial loosely and unofficially based around American courts systems completely irrational. This isn't order its ill-disguised chaos. 

[Kidpen he/him]

2 minutes ago, The Forgetful Archivist said:

I move that this be categorized as a mistrial until we can meet as delgets and create actual legal codes. The fact that we had a trial implies we want order, so I find the idea of a chaotic trial loosely and unofficially based around American courts systems completely irrational. This isn't order its ill-disguised chaos. 

Mac didn’t want to wait. He wanted to get on with it so he could die already.

The conditions were only intended to avoid any vengeance murders.

[Archer he/him]

You know what, I second the motion to appeal the ruling. On the grounds of overstepping the court's authority leading to an illegal ruling (the basis of the argument being the judge was not approved by, say, tuba. Therefore, the ruling shouldn't effect tuba.) to be clear, I thought mistspren did a great job, but there was a lot of confusion about what happened so the wrong call was made then relayed. Not necessarily his fault. 

A death row pardon two minutes too late...