Author Topic: [CLOSED]Case A026: State against Radu Bradu  (Read 3444 times)

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #15 on: 02 March, 2016, 05:04:26 PM »
If there are no direct evidences, then im not guilty. U cant acuse me of something without evidences.

(RIP) Vladimir Cheshirev

  • General group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1088
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #16 on: 02 March, 2016, 05:32:31 PM »
Dear Sir, as Prosecutor I can accuse you in whatever I want, it is His Honor Judge duty to decide if my accusations have ground or not. And I must note that you dishonor you with your behavior. Several days ago I was contacted by some wallachian Bogdan Grigore and discuss with him possibility of returning Wallachia to its people. He name you as one of his supporter and man who will build new Wallachia from aches of war. But watching your acting I doubt that you have the abilities needed to do so. We do not want from you to like us , but people must have some dignity especially if they want to be  a statesman, but you behave as cheep market-square entertainer. If all people around Bogdan Grigore are like you we will have no reason even to discuss future of Wallachia with him.

So think about what good you do now for you or for your people and country, as if you just try to humiliate your enemies it is a poor try.

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #17 on: 02 March, 2016, 05:41:26 PM »
You are off topic, Wallachia has nothing to do with this trial. I i must tell you, i dont know what you talck with Bogdan, but you dont need to give us Wallachia, we are not your sheeps, to give us some land and i dont want to be a statesman.

Also, we are not cheaters, like you!

And the off topic stop now!

I dont care what you note, what you think, nothing!
« Last Edit: 02 March, 2016, 06:12:40 PM by Radu Bradu »

(RIP) Dragan Shuysky

  • General group
  • Baby Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #18 on: 02 March, 2016, 05:46:32 PM »
Your Holiness, Thank you for presenting of Prosecution and sorry I interrupt you but political talks are more suitable for rooms of palaces and moral lectures - for the temples. We are in Court and our only goal is bring justice.

Even if Defendant again violate court procedure and speak without permission, I must agree with him that there are lack of evidences about paragraph 3 of accusations. He hold pickaxe in capital province there is no resource to dig with it and it is obvious what he used pickaxe for damaging Chapel. I will suspend this part of accusation till direct evidence of guilt are provided.

Now Defendant have permission to present Defense remarks. I must war the defender that even if he have 24 hours to prepare and present his remarks to this court his next words will be considered as presented Defense and we will continue with Prosecution final remarks. So if he continue to violate rules of trial with empty talks he will lose his chance to present his Defense adequately. Please concentrate and answer to first 2 paragraphs of accusations presented by Prosecution.
 

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #19 on: 02 March, 2016, 06:04:46 PM »
OOh, look, the kievan muppet is agree with me, and disagree with his holiLess.

(RIP) Desmond De Fayris

  • General group
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #20 on: 03 March, 2016, 05:17:10 AM »
Soon another messenger come by, and the first one is relieved.

"Greetings, members of this court.

In first instance, i would like to reiterate that Vladmir Chesirev, in regards to the Traditions and Court Rules, is but a simple man of Europe, regardless of his post as chief of some minor religion. Therefore, he lacks all and any influence or power to deny or accept my requests for nullification of this trial, and his opinion must not be held at all.

In fact, so also is the position of his excelency the judge, who has not power to decide upon the Traditional Laws and Procedures of Trials in Europe.

Only Guglielmo Di Valenza has the power to speak in this behalf, and i ask for his presence.

Then, while still in this matter, i must deny Chesirev´s impugnation of my rights to defend the accused, Radu Badu, since the Old Trial Laws read as such :

 
Quote
The Prosecution

The Prosecutor is the person or institution who arraigns the Defendant. The Prosecutor can appoint a Barrister who will pursue the prosecution. The appointed Barrister can be choosen only among the citizens of the Country in which the trial is made or among the citizens with the same nationality as the Prosecutor. It is not necessary for the Prosecutor/Barrister to be present in the region where the trial is made.

NOTE: In case of crimes against Institutions, the Prosecutor can be the Captain of the Guard, the Vassal or even the Regent himself or any other role that represents the institution. They can still appoint a Barrister.
The Defense

The Defendant is the person or Institution which is accused of committing a crime. The Defendant upon receiving notification of his trial may choose to defend himself on the forum, or he may appoint a Defense Attorney to act in his place. The role of the Defendant or Attorney in the trial is to present facts or evidences which will refute the Prosecution’s case against them during the Trial. The appointed Barrister can be choosen only among the citizens of the Country in which the trial is made or among the citizens with the same nationality as the Defendant. It is not necessary for the Attorney to be present in the region where the trial is made.

NOTE: In case of crimes committed by Institutions, the Defendant can be the Captain of the Guard, the Vassal or even the Regent himself or any other role that represents the institution. They can still appoint an Attorney.


As we all can see, the Barrister is the person appointed to represent Prossecution, whilst the person appointed to represent Defense is the Attorney.

Therefore, where one can read "The appointed Barrister can be choosen only among the citizens of the Country in which the trial is made" doesn´t refer to the Attorney and is probably only a mistake made into the original texts.

As it was firstly done, i again require for the nullification of this Trial. And may it be clear that i so require from Guglielmo Di Valenza, and not from the persons who do not possess any power to decide in such matters.

Signed :

Desmond De Fayris."

(RIP) Vladimir Cheshirev

  • General group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1088
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #21 on: 03 March, 2016, 06:07:32 AM »
Dear Sir Desmond, as may be you have no knowledge about previous similar cases you can read documentation of followed case: http://rpforum.medieval-europe.eu/index.php/topic,11383.msg78060.html#msg78060

That case was personally revised by Guglielmo Di Valenza and he personally approve mentioned post. So he clarify the trial procedure text in way I explain it to you in my previous speech. I present that facts to His Honer and he accept them.

(ooc: and again if some have suspicions that trial violate the Trial procedures described in wiki he must open the ticket not to turn court in debates on game rules violating this same Trial Procedure rules - there is no way to fight for order violating it in same time)

(RIP) Dragan Shuysky

  • General group
  • Baby Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #22 on: 03 March, 2016, 07:01:06 AM »
Once more I ask all to stop violation of order in the Court. As I say , If someone who has not receive my permission to speak what to discuss some procedures or any other matters about the trial must contact me personally, not in the court.

His Holiness provide me information from previous trial in Saxony and I read once more the text of trial procedures and I am completely convinced what word "Barrister" in The Defense section is simple mistake by copy-paste. And As we have precedent with the same issue I think that we must solve our issue in the same way. Desmond De Fayris van not represent the Defense in this court.

Next time someone violate trial rules I will fine him without excluding anyone.

As Defendant decide to be very succinct in his remark and ignore my recommendations, I give permission to the Prosecution to present its final remarks. Your Holiness, please, do not digress and concentrate on accusation you provide us with in your opening remarks. You have 24 hours on your disposal.

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #23 on: 03 March, 2016, 08:35:13 AM »
Bla bla bla, kiev muppet, you ignore everything. Well, thats why i ignore this circus so called court.

(RIP) Vladimir Cheshirev

  • General group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1088
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #24 on: 03 March, 2016, 04:09:49 PM »
Your Honer,

As you have done for Defense more then Defense itself, I will maintain only first 2 paragraphs of accusations - about citizenship and religion . With correction Prosecution plead for punishment 4 day in prison and 1200 silver coins fine.

(RIP) Dragan Shuysky

  • General group
  • Baby Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #25 on: 03 March, 2016, 11:18:37 PM »
I give permission to the Defense to present its final remarks. You have 24 hours to do so.

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #26 on: 04 March, 2016, 08:02:01 AM »
I present final remarks. 8)

(RIP) Dragan Shuysky

  • General group
  • Baby Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Honour: 0
Re: Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #27 on: 04 March, 2016, 07:21:35 PM »
So as Defendant does not deny any of accusations and Prosecution provide undisputable proves for his guilt in 2 of 3 accusations, I have no choice but to pronounce Defendant guilty in violation of citizenship and religion paragraphs of Kievan Laws.

Because of that Defendant will be punished for violation of laws of Kiev by 4 days imprisonment in prison of Pinsk and will be fined 1200 silver coins + 200 silver coins as compensation of damages he done to Chapel of Kiev + 100 silver coins for violation of court order.

By so I declare this trial closed.

(RIP) Radu Bradu

  • General group
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Honour: 0
Re: [CLOSED]Case A026: State against Radu Bradu
« Reply #28 on: 04 March, 2016, 07:28:48 PM »
I'll be back!