Call to Assize: Faeran Stonewall

Members of Wessex, on this day let it be known that a Court of Assize has been called.

Accused in this trial stands Faeran Stonewall, freewoman, for the crime of Murder.

Her accuser is Zakiyya Ajam. Zakiyya will be considered the Plaintiff in this case.


The defendant who has not given previous notice of absence from the guild has 48 hours to select a representative to respond in her stead or acknowledge she is aware of the crime she stands accused of and that she is prepared to defend herself pro se.

The defendant may also list witness' that may be called on her behalf. If this period passes without reply, the defendant shall be counted absent.

At this time the plaintiff may only post any witness' that he wishes to be called on his behalf. Any other information or claims must be held until evidence is presented.

The Carta Solis gives the defendant freeman the right to a jury of her peers and members of her neighbourhood. The jury has been chosen to meet these criteria to the greatest extent possible. The following persons have been selected to attend as jury, and are to make their presence known to the court:

-Caldros Valkran, Chancellor of Nave
-Ternix Valerius, Clerk
-Keerav Surely, Villein
-Aelian Valkran, Clerk

Each person called to jury duty needs to post within the next 24 hours simply by making acknowledgment in this thread. If any person cannot be available, they must make it known at this time so they can be replaced. Further instructions will be given to the jury once it is assembled.

All sides are prohibited from discussing the specifics of the case with any members of the jury under any circumstances until the trial has concluded. Jury tampering will be dealt with harshly.

This trial is open to the view of the public.

Sub Signum Rex.

http://duchyofwessex.org/forum/attac...tachmentid=612

I present myself for duty as juror.

Present.

I am present as juror.

Thank you Sheriff Altus Whyte and the jury for your time in this case.

I am present and I appoint Kreager Stonewall to represent me.

Zakiyya Ajam is present.

Present

The court accepts that Kreager Stonewall has been chosen to represent the defence.

If either party has to make any petitions (requests for a certain action by the court) regarding the jury, do so within 12 hours so that we can get started.

Kreager Stonewall present, representing Faeran Stonewall, Freewoman of Wessex.

Due to recent previous encounters between Ternix and Fae(which was Arbitrated by Caldros and company on the local level), I would like to petition the court to seek a new jury member as with tempers flaring for that conflict, this would provide a perfect way to extract revenge. (Summed up reason: Biased Juror)

Due to the Term peer, We would like to petition the court to replace Villein Keerav, in search of a Freeman, to fill the roll of jury of Faerans Peers.

Upon completion I would like to Petition a motion to dismiss this trail before wasting anymore of your time, your most honorable Sherrif. This motion is because there was not proper notifications on the forums mentioning the new recruit being a part of wessex. How is someone in a guild, with three wardecs, suppose to be able to identify a member of wessex who is not making there tag visible, and whom had not post in the new recruits thread as of that day.

The court calls Caldros to testify:

Did you arbitrate a dispute between Faeran and Ternix? If yes, what was it about?

Respond within 24 hours.

Yes I did your Honour. The arbitration was between accusations and arguments surrounding being in RPK! while being a member of Wessex. The accusation was of murder by Faeran to Ternix. The end result was a status quo and both parties came to terms and made amends.

It is to be noted this result was due to a lack of evidence by either side and a lack of witnesses. It was my decision that nothing would come of the situation but both parties did make amends outside of the arbitration.

The court sustains the petition to replace juror Ternix Valerius. It is not proven that the juror is biased, however the dispute is a potential cause for it, meaning that another juror might as well be summoned as long as there are available candidates. The juror is relieved from his duty.

The petition to replace juror Keerav Surely is rejected. The problem here is that a jury is to consist of both peers and members of the neighborhood, meaning that a balance has to be found between the two. After replacing Ternix, there are no more MO-freemen to choose from, and a reputable commoner of the neighborhood is selected instead.

The petition to dismiss the case is rejected. This case raises two interesting issues, problems with multi-guilding and the lawfulness of killing other lawful individuals, both of which need to be looked at and have precedents set for them.

The court summons Azidano Valkran for jury duty.

Post an acknowledgment within 24 hours.

I acknowledge the summons for jury duty, however I would like to request that I be relieved of this duty. The reason being that I had an encounter with Faeran less than two day ago. Although the goods were returned and the situation cordially resolved, I still feel that it is a potential risk of bias there.

Alright, Azidano Valkran is relieved from jury duty.

The court summons Iseult Eleos for jury duty.

Post an acknowledgment within 24 hours.

I, Iseult Eleos is present for duty as juror.

The defense has no more motions to modify the jury.

The jury has been assembled and the defendant has acknowledged the charge.

The plaintiff may go ahead and present his complaint and accusation. Describe what happened and the events leading up to it, with as much detail as possible. Post any evidence you might have.

Do so within 24 hours.

Ladies and gentlemen of the court, I would like to thank you all for being here, and spending your own time to be part of this trial.

During the early afternoon of January 9th, 2014 I logged into my Mortal Online Character Zakiyya. I had logged in Bak'ti and was heading to the East Bank to ready myself to hunt for the day. I had not been really paying attention to the chat log in game and I had just logged in to the Duchy of Wessex Teamspeak channel.

As I was getting item from by bank I started taking damage. I looked around, trying to call the guards on my attacker. It wasn't until I looked at my chat log that I saw that my attacker was a character named Nareaf. I had never seen Nareaf before this time, and had no idea why I was being attacked. As I tried to run away, Nareaf continued to attack me. I did not pull a weapon, nor did I try to attack her back as I noticed she was blue shielded. I was killed just south of the bank. As I was in the afterlife, I checked to see if I was gray for some reason, which I was not which is evident in the screen captures.

http://i.imgur.com/wrvQ6nFl.png

I spoke with Ternix Valerius and Rhodri Taliesin of whom were in Teamspeak, yet were not in or around Bak'ti at the time, and they informed me to the War Deceleration we had with the guild RPK and also of how the mechanics of the war deceleration worked. I then informed them of how I was attacked by Nareaf, who at the time was a flagged RPK member. Ternix and Rhodri both told me how Nareaf was a character of Faeran Stonewall, whom is part of Wessex society and that she wasn't allowed to do such actions against a fellow Wessex member.

As soon as I re-spawned, Naerf ran up on me and hit me with another spell, corrupt. I never had a chance to run away or defend myself. She then told me to “Get geared an fight” as seen in the screen capture. Not wanting to aggravate her further, I did not reply to her and tried to carry on as I spoke to the members of the guild about what had happened. I checked my corpse in hopes of retrieving my gear, but she had taken all my armor and weapon from it, leaving me with nothing.

http://i.imgur.com/XobsPWNl.png

Soon after, I saw Nareaf on top of a building in Bak'ti, just above the North Bank and I asked her why she had attacked me. She simply laughed at me and didn't reply. I then asked for my gear that she took from me after she killed me, which she did return. I told her that she shouldn't kill players, as it might make people leave the game.

Afterwords myself logged out of the game for the day, being quite frustrated with the whole incident. I kept on team speak to speak with the members of the guild but did not go back on Zakiyya that day.

The defence can now go ahead an present its version of events.

Do so within 24 hours.

Objection your honor, I prior to the defense giving their stance on teh events that happened that day, I would like to point out that in the plantiffs testimony here, he presents screen shots of the first death. Then twists the story to speak about to more deaths but does not show the images. If the plantiff can not provide proof of additional deaths I would like this part removed before any false information can sit with the jury longer then it already has.

Objection overruled. At this stage both parties present their version of events. It's then up to the court to decide what parts of their story is backed by evidence or not.

When we get to the rebuttals you'll have the opportunity to make specific arguments against things said by the other party. Also, when we reach this stage, quote the statements specifically, since I do not see mentions of other deaths in the paragraph under the first screenshot.


This is a summary of the basic assize procedure:

The jury is assembled
The parties present their version of events
The parties question each-other
The parties question any witnesses called to the court
The parties make rebuttals against specific statements made up to this point
The court does its questioning if necessary
The parties make their closing arguments
The jury reaches a verdict
The court announces the judgment

The court may of course deviate from this program if it's in the interest of justice.

I logged in to Morin Khur to search for some pvp in my town. There wasn't any. The night before we found DA in Bakti so I figured I'd venture there, and I did. When I got there I found ONE target. Zakiyya. I went up to him. He was unmarked but ORANGE. He looked naked but you can never underestimate those naked mages if he was one. So I attempted to speak to him. "Hi" no response. He says he wasn't paying attention yet he was responding to another person apparently in his picture. While I waited for a response I types his name into the Duchy forums and hit search. Nothing popped up. So I said "run" giving him the opportunity to get away. He STILL didn't respond. I assumed he was calling in his other DA buddies cause that is how they fight, 3 to 1 ratio, so I attacked and killed him. He didn't run he didn't fight. I took his loot and I ran to the top of a hut to make sure I had the advantage. After he resurrected, I corrupted him. I then healed him and told him he could gear up and fight. He STILL didn't respond. So I went back to the top of my hut and that's when people came in to tell me he was Wessex. I explained how he was unmarked. They said it doesn't matter he's on the forums. My permissions got taken away soon after. Zakiyya came up to me and asked me for his armor back as he didn't have a weapon on him. I gave it back and apologized. When he asked why I killed him. I told him because he was untagged(unmarked) ORANGE war target.

Let's get back to the forum part. After I was told he was on the forums, I scoured it completely. Finding no trace of him I asked how long he's been here. I was told about a week. I uped the search to show for the past year. NOTHING. Not one single thing until he posted he was present at this trial. And yesterday when he FINALLY posted on the trial members post. As for TS I was asked if I used it to see who's on so I can attack and I said no and I haven't ever done that, for the record.

This photo is to show Zakiyya showing up as an unmarked ORANGE war target. I have proof of me looking him up on the forums and finding nothing but that is sadly on my PC and I'm at work all day/evening so I'll get those out there ASAP.

Http://imgur.com/ibyYDKQ

Both parties will be given an opportunity to question each-other now.

-Keep the questions concise and to the point

-Ask one question at a time. Do not combine multiple questions into one. (If a matter is complex you'll be able to continue with follow-up questions).

-Do not make statements in questions unless the question requires it.

When objecting to multiple questions, you must provide a reason for the objection for each individual question one by one.


The plaintiff may go ahead and question the defendant now. Submit your questions within 24 hours.

If it would pleas the court, I will try to be brief as I know we have a game we enjoy and lives in the real world. I present my documentation of intent on joining the guild: http://i.imgur.com/o98SNZLl.png

Here is my acceptance to the guild as a trial member: http://i.imgur.com/iUmHbjBl.png


This refutes any claim she has that I wasn't a member of Wessex before the events of the case.

Ms. Stonewall, outside of being a naked, unarmed character who did not responding to your greeting in a guild that you had a war declaration with, did Zakiyya present a certain and irrefutable threat to you at the time of your attack? Where you in emanate danger?

Ms. Stonewall, you state that Zakiyya did in fact not run nor attack you during your attack on her. Yet you persisted in your attack, which lead to the destruction of Zakiyya. After seeing that Zakiyya did not defend herself again, why did you continue with the attack?

Ms. Stonewall, you stated in record that after Zakiyya resurrected, you corrupted her. I ask, what sort of threat does a newly resurrected, naked character with 1/5 of his or her health have that warrants a renewed attack?

Ms. Stonewall, you state that you searched the forums. You are quoted, “I scoured it completely.” Is this what you every new person you encounter, or was I just special?

If you do not, how can you be sure that anyone you attacking isn't a member of Wessex? Or, if you do, how does that work in a combat situation?

Ms. Stonewall, it is contended that you have a relationship with Wessex member, Kreager Stonewall. I would ask the court to review log-in information to ascertain the validity of my assertion.

I ask for continuance until the court has ruled on my request.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zakiyya Ajam

Ms. Stonewall, it is contended that you have a relationship with Wessex member, Kreager Stonewall. I would ask the court to review log-in information to ascertain the validity of my assertion.

---

Does the defence dispute this assertion?

Respond within 24 hours.

First off Kreager Stonewall Does dispute this. This is the most outragous Intrusive thing I have ever heard! As of 1/20/14 Faeran Stonewall Proclaimed to Mister Valkran that she was done with the drama and the harassment that has followed this trial. Thank you to the membership of wessex to ruining what was once a good thing. As Faeran is no longer a member Of the duchy I will no longer be defending her as per her request. Good day!

Plaintiff, please explain how information regarding these two users using the same computer would be relevant to this case?


The court acknowledges that Kreager Stonewall is no longer representing the defendant.

It would represent a conflict of interest for both parties. Information on one account could be accessed by an individual for less then honorable purposes and exploited.

The plaintiff's request is denied, as no valid explanation was made as to why the defendant sharing a computer with her ex-representative would affect the justice of this case.


The defendant is instructed to answer the following questions:

Quote:

---

Ms. Stonewall, outside of being a naked, unarmed character who did not responding to your greeting in a guild that you had a war declaration with, did Zakiyya present a certain and irrefutable threat to you at the time of your attack? Where you in emanate danger?

Ms. Stonewall, you state that Zakiyya did in fact not run nor attack you during your attack on her. Yet you persisted in your attack, which lead to the destruction of Zakiyya. After seeing that Zakiyya did not defend herself again, why did you continue with the attack?

Ms. Stonewall, you stated in record that after Zakiyya resurrected, you corrupted her. I ask, what sort of threat does a newly resurrected, naked character with 1/5 of his or her health have that warrants a renewed attack?

Ms. Stonewall, you state that you searched the forums. You are quoted, “I scoured it completely.” Is this what you every new person you encounter, or was I just special?

If you do not, how can you be sure that anyone you attacking isn't a member of Wessex? Or, if you do, how does that work in a combat situation?

---

Do so within 24 hours.

I have proof of me searching the forums and NOT being able to find those posts. I'm not saying you weren't a member. I'm saying I saw nothing that said you were. I thought you were DA, that's why I killed you. It implies that in my post of events.

Yes, he was a threat, he didn't respond which made me think he was calling in DA friends to come gank me. Which is also stated in my post of events.

He was a WAR target. Does ANYONE here understand what that means? YOU ALL KNOW that when you're in a war in MO you need to be careful and not let the enemy get the advantage. When you were at war with HAWK, you went to Tindrem and killed them regardless of whether or not they were acting hostile or not. Same with RAGE.

Usually I don't keep my war targets alive at all. I didn't see anymore DA so I stopped attacking after the last corrupt. I then healed you and told you that you could gear up and fight me instead of me just killing you with no fight, cause that's no fun. REMEMBER I thought you were DA.

Ever since I attacked Opius (Rhodri's butcher), not knowing he was Rhodri's butcher at the time, I started searching the forums via my Iphone. I found nothing about you (and I have proof that I couldn't see that post). I probably still can't see it. And I scoured it completely after you died. Instead of just searching your name, I went through every thread I had access to, and STILL found nothing.

In combat, it didn't matter, I don't attack Wessex unless they attack me. And all who come out in combat should wear WSX tag. I expect that since you are a part of Wessex in MO that you wear the WSX tag. Be proud of the guild you're in.

Plaintiff, post any follow-up questions or state that you do not have any.

Do so within 24 hours.

My apologies to the court for my tardiness. It will not happen again.


Ms. Stonewall, you knew that RPK was in a war with Wessex. Knowing your agreement with Wessex was that you are not to do anything that hurts Wessex, why did you stay in a guild that was at war with Wessex?


Ms. Stonewall, you sated that you came to Bak'ti but as a member of Wessex, you would know that Bak'ti is a Wessex city. Many members call Bak'ti their home. Why put yourself in a position where you could possibly hurt another Wessex member? Why not hunt where DA normally is at?


Ms. Stonewall, you told me to “gear up and fight” yet you took my weapons and armor from my carcass after killing me. Being as I had only been playing four days at this point, how could I fight you after you had stolen my items?

Defendant, proceed and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

I didn't do anything to hurt Wessex. I can control myself in a situation like that. I didn't attack any Wessex member that I knew was a Wessex member. You were unmarked and not viewable on the forums.

I didn't put myself in any position my friend. Wessex members should wear their tag at all times. You put yourself in the position by wearing no tag and not properly posting on the forums. DA was seen in Bakti. I went to the last place I saw them last.

How am I supposed to know you only have one gear set? And you had no weapons in your loot bag just flakestone and plate armor. I don't even think it was a full set. I didn't know you were new or Wessex. So please stop asking questions related to you as the answer will stay the same...I didn't know you were Wessex because you were unmarked and not on the forums.

Plaintiff, submit any final follow-up questions if you still have something important to ask or state that you do not have any. The questioning shouldn't go on for too long so only post a third set of questions if there is still something important that has not been answered.

Do so within 24 hours.

Just two more questions.

Ms. Stonewall, you currently hold rank 9 standing within RPK. That seems rather high. The only title higher then that is guild master. That must have be a lot of time and hard work invested. If you have put so much work into RPK to obtain such a rank, why are you with Wessex? If there was an open war between Wessex and RPK, which side would you be fighting for?

Ms. Stonewall, you are quoted saying, "YOU HAVE A CHOICE to come out and fight us [RPK!]. If you don't want to lose your "expensive" gear stay in town." (Link here) You go on to say how powerful and numberous RPK is in contrast to Wessex. Which guild do you like more?

Defendant, continue and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

I object to both these questions as they have nothing to do with the death of the Plaintiff. However, if anyone wishes answers to these questions feel free to contact me via TS or PMs.

I choose to answer these instead of objecting to them.

We don't have titles in RPK like they do in Wessex. All of the veteran players that the guild master trusts is rank 9. I actually spend more time defending Wessex (talking to people to get wardecs ended and paying off your debts) and time watching you guys duel and trying to help. When I'm not Pvping I'm in some way helping Wessex. Maybe you just don't know it. If there was an open war where one side truly hated the other I wouldn't fight either side because both communities are filled with good friends. If RPK seriously wanted to hurt you guys I would fight for the fight to end. But that isn't the intention. It's just open pvp.

Both guilds have something I love, besides some of the people in it, that I haven't seen combined in MO. Wessex is a part of a feudal society reinactment. That's right up my alley. Wessex is also my home in MO. Whether I'm in it or out of it, I will always be there for the people if I can be. RPK is my second home. When I was roaming around solo for 4 months after everything got sieged they offered me spot in their guild and I found all my northern friends and have been with them ever since. I can't give you an answer of who I like more. I'm fighting to keep myself here. That has to say something.

The defendant may go ahead and question the plaintiff now. Submit your questions or state that you do not have any within 24 hours.

1.) I remember the former Governor General, Sir Otto Osterwind, saying SEVERAL times, if you did not have a geared fighting character ready, you should not be guilded in game. If you did, and even if you didn't, have a geared fight ready character, why didn't you have your tag up so others could see it?

2.) Why didn't you properly post on the forums, for example, in the Trial Members Post? NOTE: I can't and have never been able to see where you posted. http://imgur.com/qpDaj9V This link shows what my forums look like.

3.) You told the court you were not paying attention to the chat window correct? If this is true, how was it that you were holding another conversation with another person while not looking at your window?

4.) Is it true that either Rhodri Taliesin or Ternix Valerius were the ones who said you should take me to court?

5.) Prior to either of them telling you to bring me to court, did you feel that your death justified this trial?

6.) If a member of wessex, who is not me, had killed you then healed you and returned your stuff, would you be bringing them to trial?

7.) Have you ever killed an untagged character?

Plaintiff, proceed and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

1.) I remember the former Governor General, Sir Otto Osterwind, saying SEVERAL times, if you did not have a geared fighting character ready, you should not be guilded in game. If you did, and even if you didn't, have a geared fight ready character, why didn't you have your tag up so others could see it?

---

I had only been in the game 3 days on the day you killed me. I had no idea about the tag or even how to turn it off/on.

Quote:

---

2.) Why didn't you properly post on the forums, for example, in the Trial Members Post? NOTE: I can't and have never been able to see where you posted. http://imgur.com/qpDaj9V This link shows what my forums look like.

---

I do not recall why or why not. I would assume it being very new to the game and the guild and not knowing my way around the forums at the time.

Quote:

---

3.) You told the court you were not paying attention to the chat window correct? If this is true, how was it that you were holding another conversation with another person while not looking at your window?

---

I didn't have a mic for team speak at the time, so I would respond via guild chat. I believe that what you were seeing was a mis-tell.

Quote:

---

4.) Is it true that either Rhodri Taliesin or Ternix Valerius were the ones who said you should take me to court?

---

No.

Quote:

---

5.) Prior to either of them telling you to bring me to court, did you feel that your death justified this trial?

---

Neither of them did tell me to do so. But, after I learned about Wessex laws and rights, and how you were a member of an opposing guild, yes I did. Prior to, I had no idea about trials. But I did think the whole thing stinks. Having a member of your enemy within your own guild is a huge breach of security.

Quote:

---

6.) If a member of wessex, who is not me, had killed you then healed you and returned your stuff, would you be bringing them to trial?

---

If you are asking if someone else in Wessex attacked me after me presenting no threat to them, after being alt tabed only to find myself under attack, who then killed me, and then attacked me again, then healed me, and goaded me to attack them, then ran away and jumped on-top of a hut and when I asked them why they attacked me only laughed at me and who only gave me my things back after I begged them and never said “Sorry” yeah, we'd still be right here. A simple answer for the Court is, “Yes.”

Quote:

---

7.) Have you ever killed an untagged character?

---

It's been debated if I have killed anyone, untagged or not.

Defendant, post any follow-up questions or state that you do not have any.

Do so within 24 hours.

1.) You once again confirm you had only been in games 4 days, sorry, you changed it to 3 days. How can this be true when this screen shot shows you wearing a veteran cape that requires a 10 month membership to the game? http://imgur.com/F2xJGwa

2.) You say neither Rhodri nor Ternix told you about the laws of Wessex. Who did, so that we may call them as a witness?

3.) You say it's been debated whether or not you have killed anyone. How is this a debate when your character sheet clearly shows you have killed 9 innocent blue characters? I now present the screen shot. http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...ps2937dded.png

Plaintiff, proceed and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

1.) You once again confirm you had only been in games 4 days, sorry, you changed it to 3 days. How can this be true when this screen shot shows you wearing a veteran cape that requires a 10 month membership to the game? [url]http://imgur.com/F2xJGwa[/url]

---

I played way back in beta. I left for many years. Only came back January 5th, 2014. I was just as shocked to see the cape offered to me as you were. Any reasonable person could understand how leaving a game as deep and complex as Mortal Online is would result in forgetting a lot of the nuances of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

2.) You say neither Rhodri nor Ternix told you about the laws of Wessex. Who did, so that we may call them as a witness?

---

Brother Azidano Valkran.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

3.) You say it's been debated whether or not you have killed anyone. How is this a debate when your character sheet clearly shows you have killed 9 innocent blue characters? I now present the screen shot. http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y125/bethdar/ZakiyyaKucukstats_zps2937dded.png

---

I killed blues in duels to help get their hunger up.

Defendant, submit any final follow-up questions if you still have something important to ask or state that you do not have any. The questioning shouldn't go on for too long so only post a third set of questions if there is still something important that has not been answered.

Do so within 24 hours.

Given the information, and proof, that I have of not being able to recognize you as a member of Wessex, why do you feel it's still murder?

Do you have any proof that I taunted you after your death? As an example, how you stated you had to beg me for your gear.

Plaintiff, continue and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

Given the information, and proof, that I have of not being able to recognize you as a member of Wessex, why do you feel it's still murder?

---

Objection your honor: Calls for a conclusion. The defendant's question asks for an opinion rather than facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

Do you have any proof that I taunted you after your death? As an example, how you stated you had to beg me for your gear.

---

After your attack on me, I was so frustrated that I didn't think to take one other screenshot.

Objection sustained.


Neither party has listed any witnesses to be called.


Camarro Valkran has dutifully reported to the court that she witnessed the events in question.

The court calls Camarro Valkran to present this testimony. Do so within 24 hours.

I was in Bakti in the person of Convenio DaMortas (an unguilded alt.) RPK had recently wardecced us. I was in Wessex ts as Camarro, Zakkiya was also in the channel. She was listen only and was taking part in the conversation via text chat. She was known to be a new member of the Duchy of Wessex.

I noticed that Faeran Stonewall was also in our ts, moving at one point to our Garrison channel. In view of the wardec I was concerned about this, and reported it both in ts and on our forum. I was told that Faeran was a "special case" and it was acceptable.

Zakkiya then reported that she had been killed in Bakti by Nareaf. I was told that Nareaf was an alt of Faeran. I requested permission to enter Bakti in the person of Camarro DaMortas and kill Nareaf; this was refused.

I then heard someone say on ts that Nareaf was taunting Zakkiya. I moved towards the West side of Bakti to see what was happening. Zakkiya had just been restored to life by the Bakti priest, and was running back to West bank. Nareaf was standing on a hut and taunting Zakkiya by saying "run" in local chat. Zakkiya asked "Why did you kill me?" and Nareaf simply mocked her with "hehehe." Zakkiya asked for her possessions back, but I was outraged by what had been allowed to happen; I became involved in an angry debate on ts, and saw no more of the incident.

I hereby assert and affirm that the above statement is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
<Signed> Convenio DaMortas
<Presented by> Camarro Valkran

http://www.technopepper.com/social/MO/trial1.jpg

Plaintiff, you may now question the witness or state that you do not have any questions.

Do so within 24 hours.

Mr. Valkran, I'd like to thank you for taking time of your own schedule to be here.


Mr. Valkran, did you see Zakkiya doing anything would cause Ms. Stonewall to attack her? Was Zakkiya being rude or threatening towards Ms. Stonewall?


Mr. Valkran, the defense’s case relies solely on that fact that Ms. Stonewall did not know Zakkiya was a member of Wessex. You stated that Ms. Stonewall was logged into the Duchy of Wessex TeamSpeak server and also entered the Garrison channel while Zakkiya was also logged into the same TeamSpeak server. Is this true to the best of your knowledge?


Mr. Valkran, is it reasonable to say that Ms. Stonewall did in fact see Zakkiya within the Wessex TeamSpeak?

Witness, proceed and submit answers to the questions.

Defendant, you may object to the questions if you want to.

Do so within 24 hours.


The following is some information on objections. Keep in mind that these are just to give the parties an idea of what an invalid question might be, and are not necessarily valid reasons for an objection in this court. Neither are you required to learn lawyer terminology, you just need to be able to describe a reason when objecting. http://trial.laws.com/objection

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zakiyya Ajam

Mr. Valkran, did you see Zakkiya doing anything would cause Ms. Stonewall to attack her? Was Zakkiya being rude or threatening towards Ms. Stonewall?

---

I did not see any such behaviour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zakiyya Ajam

Mr. Valkran, the defense’s case relies solely on that fact that Ms. Stonewall did not know Zakkiya was a member of Wessex. You stated that Ms. Stonewall was logged into the Duchy of Wessex TeamSpeak server and also entered the Garrison channel while Zakkiya was also logged into the same TeamSpeak server. Is this true to the best of your knowledge?

---

That is correct. It was one of the reasons that I voiced my concerns because, to the best of my knowledge, it meant that a member of RPK could see who we had in ts and therefore assess our strength.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zakiyya Ajam

Mr. Valkran, is it reasonable to say that Ms. Stonewall did in fact see Zakkiya within the Wessex TeamSpeak?

---

Removed - Objection sustained.

I object to the second and third questions based on speculation; there has been no proof provided that I was in the Defense of the Realm channel, also there is no way Camarro Valkran or any member of Wessex can honestly say if a member of Wessex saw something on a program that we run in the background.

To clarify:
To question #2 There is no proof that I was in said channel and any testimony would only be speculation and not fact.
To question #3 No member of an online guild can honestly say what another member of the same online guild can see from their PC screen.

Objection #2 overruled, #3 sustained. A witness can testify about things that they have actually seen or have some other way of knowing.

Plaintiff, submit follow-up questions or state that you do not have any. Do so within 24 hours.

Going forward, the court may give the parties less than 24 hours to respond with follow-up questions in order to speed up the questioning phase.

No further questions

Defendant, you may now question the witness or state that you do not have any questions.

Do so within 24 hours.

1.) Do you have any proof that I was in the Garrison's channel on the day of the "murder"?

2.) Since you were supposedly noticing all the channels I was in, which channel was I in when I killed Zakkiya?

3.) Did you know RPK was at war with 3 different guilds on the day of the "murder"?

4.) Did you know Zakkiya was unmarked, and not PROPERLY on the forums on the day of the "murder"?

5.) You state that you saw this whole thing happen is that correct? You stated that I said "run" to him AFTER he got killed, that I was "taunting" him right? If that's the case, how is it taunting when Zakkiya's image shows the same conversation BEFORE his death (notice how the text above it says, "Gotharian says: Gotharian eat this"?

http://imgur.com/2IEtQ9N - Zakkiya's Image

http://imgur.com/zcazIIN - Camarro's Image

6.) Neither of us (Zakkiya or Faeran) stated that I said "run" AFTER Zakkiya's death. Therefore, I would like you to please explain how that chat log ended up on your screen without noticing what was happening.

7.) Images show that you saw what was going on. Why didn't you tell me Zakkiya was a serf while I was waiting for his response?

Witness, proceed and submit answers to the questions within 24 hours.

Objections are to be made within 24 hours.

1. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Do you have any proof that I was in the Garrison's channel on the day of the "murder"?

   ---

Objection your Honor: Mr. Valkran is in the court as an eye witness and therefore direct evidence to the event.

1. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Since you were supposedly noticing all the channels I was in, which channel was I in when I killed Zakkiya?

   ---

   1. No objections.
2. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Did you know RPK was at war with 3 different guilds on the day of the "murder"?

   ---

   1. Objection your Honor: Irrelevant question. This has nothing to do with Mr. Valkran's statement or the events of that day.

1. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Did you know Zakkiya was unmarked, and not PROPERLY on the forums on the day of the "murder"?

   ---

   1. Objection your Honor: Irrelevant question, misleading, and asked and answered. Court has evidence that Zakkiya was registered on the forums during the time of the event in question.
2. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   You state that you saw this whole thing happen is that correct? You stated that I said "run" to him AFTER he got killed, that I was "taunting" him right? If that's the case, how is it taunting when Zakkiya's image shows the same conversation BEFORE his death (notice how the text above it says, "Gotharian says: Gotharian eat this"?
   
   http://imgur.com/2IEtQ9N - Zakkiya's Image
   
   http://imgur.com/zcazIIN - Camarro's Image

   ---

   1. Objection your Honor: Compound question.
3. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Neither of us (Zakkiya or Faeran) stated that I said "run" AFTER Zakkiya's death. Therefore, I would like you to please explain how that chat log ended up on your screen without noticing what was happening.

   ---

   1. Objection: Calls for speculation .

1. Quote:

   ---

   Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

   Images show that you saw what was going on. Why didn't you tell me Zakkiya was a serf while I was waiting for his response?

   ---

   1. Objection your Honor: Vague question. “His response” isn't a set time and could refer to one of many times both prior to and after the events in question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

1.) Do you have any proof that I was in the Garrison's channel on the day of the "murder"?

---

I was concerned that a breach of security had occurred so at 08:12 on 9 Jan 2104 I posted this question in the forum: "Is it OK to have members of RPK

in the Garrison TS, especially while we are at war? I am simply asking because I don't know the Duchy rules, but I'll admit I was surprised." The post

included this image:
http://www.technopepper.com/social/MO/wardec1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

2.) Since you were supposedly noticing all the channels I was in, which channel was I in when I killed Zakkiya?

---

I do not recall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

4.) Did you know Zakkiya was unmarked, and not PROPERLY on the forums on the day of the "murder"?

---

As regards her tag, she was untagged as per the standing WSX wartime instructions, viz. non-combatants should remove tags to avoid being blue scouted.

As regards her status on the forums on the day in question I have no idea.



3, 5, 6, 7 Removed - Objection sustained.

#1 overruled. He can still be asked about evidence in addition to his witnessing.

#3 sustained.

#4 overruled.

#5 sustained.

#6 sustained.

#7 sustained.


Defendant, clarify or reword what you're asking in question 6. You can not ask for speculation. Define exactly when "while I was waiting for his response" is in question 7. Do so within 24 hours


Witness, answer the following three questions meanwhile:

You state that you saw this whole thing happen is that correct?

You stated that I said "run" to him AFTER he got killed, that I was "taunting" him right?

If that's the case, how is it taunting when Zakkiya's image shows the same conversation BEFORE his death (notice how the text above it says, "Gotharian says: Gotharian eat this"?

http://imgur.com/2IEtQ9N - Zakkiya's Image

http://imgur.com/zcazIIN - Camarro's Image

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altus Whyte

You state that you saw this whole thing happen is that correct?

---

To the best of my knowledge I have not stated that I saw "the whole thing." I have described in my statement to the court what I saw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altus Whyte

You stated that I said "run" to him AFTER he got killed, that I was "taunting" him right?

If that's the case, how is it taunting when Zakkiya's image shows the same conversation BEFORE his death (notice how the text above it says, "Gotharian says: Gotharian eat this"?

http://imgur.com/2IEtQ9N - Zakkiya's Image

http://imgur.com/zcazIIN - Camarro's Image

---

My evidence stated the sequence of events as I believed it to be at the time. Given the overall context and the comments "run" and "hehehe" I consider my description of taunting to be justified.

6.) Mr.Valkran, were you there during the actual killing of Zakkiya? If not, why does the chat log clearly show that you were?

7.) Images show that you saw what was going on. Why didn't you tell me Zakkiya was a serf in between when I tried communicating with him to the time of the killing?

Witness, proceed and answer the last questions within 24 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

6.) Mr.Valkran, were you there during the actual killing of Zakkiya? If not, why does the chat log clearly show that you were?

---

I was in Bakti but I did not see the killing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faeran Stonewall

7.) Images show that you saw what was going on. Why didn't you tell me Zakkiya was a serf in between when I tried communicating with him to the time of the killing?

---

For a number of reasons. I didn't really know who you were at the time, but I had been told you were "a special case" and "it was OK." I also do not engage in chat with people we are at war with, and I would certainly not identify an untagged Wessex member to an enemy.

Defendant, post any follow-up questions or state that you do not have any.

Do so within 12 hours.

Objections can be contested within 12 hours after they are made.

No further questions. Thank you Mr.Valkran for your time.

We can now proceed with actual rebuttals.

The plaintiff may now go ahead and make rebuttals or arguments in regards to what has been said and posted such far.

Do so within 24 hours.

No arguments your Honor.

The defendant may now go ahead and make rebuttals or arguments in regards to what has been said and posted such far.

Do so within 24 hours.

I have one arguement about the witness statement. Mr. Valkran implies he saw me at 8:12 on the 9th of January in the TS. However, Zakkiya states he was attacked by me in the early afternoon. A.) Mortal Online is down every morning at 8:12 for a reboot. B.) No one at all can say what any one person saw or didn't see in a TS 5-7 hours before or after the early afternoon, or at anytime actually.


This is of course assuming everyone described their times in the proper time zone since this forum runs off of GMT -5.

The forum time is whatever you set your time-zone as.

Plaintiff and witness, go ahead and state what time-zone you have used in your previous statements. If there has been any confusion due to AM/PM conversion state that as well. Do so within 24 hours.

Going forward, all should state the time-zone UTC-offset when dealing with time in any way. If a time-zone isn't specified, it will be assumed to be universal time (UTC). If AM/PM isn't specified, it will be assumed to be 24-hour time.

My apologies to the court. I took the time from the Duchy of Wessex forum post I made, not noticing that it uses 12 hour rather than 24 hour format. My statement should have read "at 08:12 PM on 9th January" ie. 20:12. This is 20:12 GMT.

All times stated by council have been in PST (GMT-8) All my forum times are also set to the same time zone.

I move to strike Ms. Stonewalls argument from record, as to not cause confusion within the jury.

There shouldn't be any confusion at all. The only proof Zakiyya could possibly have of me knowing he was a Wessex member is the TS. Court is based on facts. And the fact is I didn't see you. I didn't know you existed in Wessex. If Mr. Valkran's "proof" has no date so it's not proof at all. But it's even more so invalid if both statements are hours apart.

All the defendant seems to claim is that, in regards to evidence (not testimony), the witness does not have evidence of seeing her in the channel at the time of the killing, only on that day, and that her being in the channel doesn't prove her seeing the plaintiff. This shouldn't confuse the jury. Motion denied.


Juror Keerav Surely is removed from the jury after failing to respond and confirm that she is still a member of Wessex and this Jury.


The court summons Valdovas Kadangi for jury duty.

Post an acknowledgment within 24 hours.

I acknowledge the summons.

Did I miss something? I see no post that I was supposed to do something...surely if the court has questions they would've stated them by now... Why a stand still with my trial?

The updated jury has been assembled and is in preliminary deliberations.


Meanwhile I'll ask the defendant to provide some additional information by answering the following question within 24 hours.

Did anyone explain the terms and conditions of being a member of an outside clan while still remaining a member of Wessex to you?

No. Not all at once, and not by just one person. It was like many people made the decision on what I could and could not do. In the end, I couldn't do anything because of ALL the restrictions.

When I first went to RPK!, the condition was that I do not attack Wessex members unless they attacked me first. The former General Otto Osterwind gave me these terms and probably because he trusted that I wasn't out there to hurt Wessex, in which he was correct. I have never been out to hurt Wessex or their members.

This was fine for a while actually. No one from Wessex would attack me and I wouldn't attack anyone that I knew was from Wessex. I did have an accident when I attacked an untagged blue (Opius, Rhodri's butcher) that was in town. After that I felt I had to check the WSX forums before I attacked any untagged blue. I apologized maybe a million times to both Ternix (who was on the character at the time) and Rhodri. I offered Ternix 1k Ironsilk and got him the Ironsilk lore book in Tindrem. Ternix apologized to me for acting the way he did and that he was just caught up in the current war they were in. Everything was okay after that, so I thought.

Then the rules changed once Ternix hit me (almost killing me) and I turned around and killed him (obviously self defense). The rules were changed to I couldn't attack Wessex at all. That was still fine with me. I just attacked those who weren't Wessex members, let Wessex attack me, healed myself and my guildmates.

Then the rules changed again. I couldn't attack anyone that was friendly with Wessex. Still, I could manage that. I just stayed in the back healing/purifying.

Whatever the reason was for it this time, the rules changed again. I was to disengage from combat entirely. So whenever RPK! went to Bakti, I would go in town if I was blue, or sit on PVP hill if I was red. I couldn't do anything but sit there.

The whole point of going to RPK! was to get PvP, to play with one set of friends, while helping my other set of friends, which worked for a while. In the end (before I felt I had to leave to reprove myself to WSX), it was as if certain people (Rhodri and Ternix) were just waiting for me to have an accident so that they could jump all over it and make me look like an enemy. Why they would do that, I don't know really. Maybe they felt they would gain some power from it by making someone with power in another guild seem like an enemy.

However, now that I think of it, through all of this mess I just typed above, I NEVER EVER "attacked" anyone that I knew was from Wessex. When I went to Bakti, I went for and engaged in OPEN PVP. I never killed the random people outside of Bakti no matter who they were. I, and most of my group, waited for a force that was going to come up against us and fight us. When people come out of town, prepared to fight another force, it's called OPEN PVP. Engaging in OPEN PVP is NOT is not an evil act or an attack against ANY guild. If no one comes out, we leave.

Honestly this has nothing to do with my trial and should not sway the jury one way or another, but I have nothing to hide.

Both parties have had plenty of time to make any rebuttals or petitions now, so we can move on to the closing arguments.

Plaintiff, you may proceed and make your closing argument. Do so within 24 hours.

Your Honor. I must ask for a short continuance. I have just started working and only noticed the trial updated after I got off work today. If it pleases the court, I will have my closing argument done within a few hours.

I apologize for the delay and I assure you that the prosecution is currently working on its closing argument and it will be done shortly.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury:


Thank you for taking your time through this process. I apologize for my delay.


On January 9th, 2014 Ms. Stonewall attacked, and killed Zakiyya Ajam while in Bak'ti. Both parties have said as much. Yet the reason we are here today is because the defendant, Ms. Stonewall claims that she “didn't know” that Zakiyya was part of Wessex. In fact, the defendant's case is entirely based on that one point. But the defense contradicts itself quite often, and doesn't take the proper precautions in order to truly find out who someone is.


Ms. Stonewall voluntary joined the guild RPK, a guild that is known for killing random players, players who can not defend themselves, who pose little to no threat to them. This wasn't a guild that was a neutral guild to Wessex, let alone friendly. This was a guild that stands against everything Wessex is within Mortal Online, and in fact is on our kill on sight list. She knew that when she joined with RPK she could not attack any Wessex members without them attacking her first. It was her responsibility to check her targets, and make sure they were not of Wessex in any way.


During the time of the murder, Ms. Stonewall says she “scoured [the Wessex forums] completely” but could not find Zakiyya as part of Wessex. Yet there are other ways to search for a guild member. Why did she not also take advantage of the Chronicles via the Mortal Online website? Or use the community list located within our own forms? Here we see that that Ms. Stonewall did not take the proper precautions in regard to killing another player. But this was not the first time she had made this mistake.


Ms. Stonewall herself tells the court of how she attacked two other members of Wessex prior to this case because again, she didn't know they were part of Wessex. There was also an issue with Brother Azidano Valkran and Ms. Stonewall that kept the now Reverend Azidano Valkran from being part of the jury in this case. Each time we hear Ms. Stonewall tell us how she didn't know that the member was part of Wessex. But this time, there is proof. Zakiyya was part of Wessex. Any search on the Chronicals or even within our own forums could turn up that information.


Mr. Camarro Valkran, who came forth on his own accord, showed the court further proof that not only was Zakiyya in the Duchy of Wessex TeamSpeak server but so was Ms. Stonewall. Furthermore, Ms. Stonewall was also in the garrison channel at the same time Zakiyya was logged into the same TeamSpeak server.


There are many ways Ms. Stonewall could have known Zakiyya was a member of Wessex. The fact that Ms. Stonewall had multiple issues in the past with other guild members prior to this murder should have taught her to be extra careful. To use the resources that were available to her. Remember, it was her own decision to join RPK and that she was trusted not to attack members of Wessex. She made this choice.


On January 9th, Ms. Stonewall came to Bak'ti, looking to kill. She came to attack members of another guild that RPK was in a war declaration with inside Bak'ti. Yet, Ms. Stonewall also mentions that RPK was in a war declaration with The Duchy of Wessex at the time. Ms. Stonewall knew that Wessex resides in Bak'ti. She knew that her guild is in a war with Wessex at the time, yet she chose to attack an untagged orange within the city.


Ms. Stonewall is quoted:


“When I went to Bakti, I went for and engaged in OPEN PVP. I never killed the random people outside of Bakti no matter who they were. I, and most of my group, waited for a force that was going to come up against us and fight us.”


Yet here we are, with Ms. Stonewall inside of Bak'ti, attacking a random person. A person who is part of Wessex. A person who wasn't outside the walls and who was going to “come up against” RPK. This person was not attacking anything. This person was just pulling this out of their bank in hopes of a profitable day and to talk to some friends they had just made in game.


For any new player to Mortal Online, being killed and having their loot taken is a horrible awaking of the mechanics of the game. Finding out it was one of their own guild members makes it so much worse. Then, finding out they are unable to attack back, while that member is part of a guild we have on our Kill on Sight list makes it frustrating enough to even leave the guild. Yes, Mortal Online is an open world pvp game. But that doesn't mean death doesn't have consequences. For new players it means hours of work to regain money for gear. For crafters, it means having to go back out and hit a rock for hours on end to make up what they loss. It means having to spend our time trying to recoup while the person who did the killing can go about killing and looting more.


This entire case deals with many hot topic issues. Issues of multi-guilding. Issues with the lawfulness of killing other lawful individuals. Is it clear that Ms. Stonewall did what she felt was enough searching before she attacked? Yes. But was that enough? Clearly not, as a fresh recruit of Wessex had been murdered then looted of all that they had.


Ms. Stonewall will try to tell the court how Zakiyya should have been tagged at the time of the murder. Yet Mr. Camarro Valkran states that Wessex wartime policy is “non-combatants should remove tags to avoid being blue scouted.” Does our laws not protect us even if we are not tagged? Even if we are untagged, we are still members of Wessex, and therefore protected by the agreement Ms. Stonewall had with Sir Otto Osterwind.


Ms. Stonewall will also say how she gave the items back to Zakiyya. Yet remember this was only after she was asked to by Zakiyya. Never was there proof of an apology. There was no communication between the two parties, in hopes of making amends. The only communication Zakiyya got from Ms. Stonewall that day was “Run”, “Get geared an fight” and her laughter after the kill.


Ms. Stonewall has put herself into this position that she is in today. She joined a guild, looking for pvp. A guild known for killing random players. She was instructed not to attack members of Wessex while within that guild. Yet, there are at least two separate times she did just that prior to the events of the case. Even when her guild was in a full war with Wessex, she did not leave her guild. She did not keep away from Bak'ti where she knew Wessex members call home. Where new members feel safe from the random player killers such as members of RPK outside of the walls. Ms. Stonewall stood in the middle of Bak'ti, waiting for her next kill. And she found it in a member of Wessex, again. How many times will we allow this? How many other members of Wessex must be told of this “special case”? When do finally stand up and say enough of the random killings from members of our own community?

Defendant, you may proceed and make your closing argument. Do so within 24 hours.

I too must ask for a continuance. This is my weekend that I work doubles Saturday AND Sunday, that I've already notified to the sheriff might happen during this trial. I will be able to submit my closing argument Monday. Please and thank you.

Well, I had a long speech thought up in my head, but events have happened in the past few days that make me feel it really doesn't matter what I write. Zakkiya, my closing argument is for you.

Zakkiya, the court knows I killed you. They know why I killed you. They know there is no proof that I saw you in channel. They know I couldn't see you on the forums because for some reason a serf has more perms than a freewoman (weird).

I didn't notice me contradicting myself, but I did notice me calling you out on a couple things. For example you never left for years, you left for months. MO is on its 3rd year. And no one forgets this game, that's why those who leave, always come back. You're brand new? No, not with that cape you're not. STOP exaggerating. Also, you saying you weren't paying attention to chat when you were clearly responding to someone else while I was trying to talk to you...right.

I didn't search enough? You were an untagged WAR target, you didn't respond, you didn't correctly post on the forums like YOU should have. You pretty much gave me no choice since I came to the conclusion you weren't WSX you were DA. Sorry I obeyed the order to NOT look at TS to see who's on. Maybe YOU should've done better research when entering a guild like WSX and properly post on the forums in the proper section. I did way more than enough giving the situation I was in. I've been out of the guild for a year (but remained in the community for access of the goods in the north). 2-3 accidents in 365 days is not bad, especially in THIS game, with MY play style.

You have NOTHING on me Zakkiya, you got your stuff back after I learned you were WSX, you got an apology which no one conveniently screen shotted. You know what I got? Outcasted. Harassed by multiple people.

It's pretty damn interesting the TWO guys that advised you are gone. Whether it was by a temper tantrum, or treason. They aren't here...cause they suck.

Good luck in game Zakkiya. You don't see me upset when WSX kills me AND takes ALL my stuff, even though the order is to leave me alone.

The court will now proceed to reach a verdict and judgment.

On the initial charge of murder, which is the highest degree of a killing-related crime for homicides severe enough to warrant exile, the defendant is found not guilty. The killing is not found to be of the highest degree of severity since the court does not believe that the defendant acted with malicious intent or that the defendant knew that the plaintiff was a member of Wessex. It was a first time offense and the damage and permanency of the killing has also been taken into account.

The defendant is found guilty of aggravated battery, the lesser degree for killing-related crimes. The laws of Hyperion, which is a lawful kingdom, traditionally extend to protect all lawful civilized individuals, unless an exception to this principle is made for a certain game, which has not been found to be the case for MO. The defendant killed a lawful inhabitant of Bakti without justification, regardless of whether the victim was a Hyperion subject or not. Even if the defendant did not intentionally kill a lawful individual, the defendant is still guilty of criminal negligence in not realizing these circumstances, which any lawful person is reasonably expected to understand.

As for the defendant's justification of the victim being a war target, the justification of war can only be used by a lawful combatant fighting for a lawful force. The defendant was fighting for a group known as RPK, which even names itself after its activity of killing innocent civilians. RPK is found by the court to be a group of bandits or nomadic killers, not lawful combatants. The justification of war is therefore not valid under these circumstances.


It has been disputed whether the plaintiff was properly registered as a member on the forums at the time of the incident. Since the defendant is guilty of killing a lawful person, the dispute over the plaintiff's status as a Wessex member is not relevant. Nevertheless, the court will bring clarity to this dispute by affirming that according to the change-history log, the plaintiff's status was updated to member along with the name being changed to Zakiyya at the same day as the killing. The logs do not show at what time exactly the name was changed, and thus do not determine whether the plaintiff was properly displayed as a member or not at the time of the incident. Due to the administrative procedures of the forums sometimes resulting in new members not displaying their correct status for as long as a week after joining, forum status alone is not enough to determine with certainty whether someone is not a member.

In regard to Hyperion law extending to protect non-subjects, the traditional rule going back to the great era of 2009 was to not attack un-guilded blues or members of recognized nations. Legally this means lawful individuals or subjects of lawful states. Individuals belonging or affiliated to unlawful unrecognized groups are fair game as described in article 34 of Carta Solis: "Landholders shall bear the right to police their holdings and neighboring badlands or wastelands of barbarians, hillmen, outlaws, renegades, nomads, and all such as hold neither sovereignty nor statehood in the eyes of the Crown." A precedent on this matter is the 09-03-31 fining of Razmus Serventus for robbing a non-subject merchant. An exception to this policy is reasonable for games in which there is little or no established civil society. This would include PvP games without any significant social gameplay elements, but where random unidentified individuals are still encountered.

Concerning multi-guilding, there has been a custom of allowing members to be in other guilds as long as their extra memberships in no way conflict with the interests of Wessex, which is their responsibility to ensure. This has never been a legal right though, and the leadership has full authority over their subjects in their game or territory, limited only by laws. (In cases where games have multiple fully independent servers and game worlds, the territorial jurisdiction would most likely be limited to the particular server). A colonial governor could for example not give a member permission to kill other members since the governor can not overrule royal law. Within his jurisdiction, the governor could allow or forbid multi-guilding or regulate it in a decree. The governor could also order any subject in his territory to leave any other clan or group if it for example causes a conflict of interest. If any law or decree, on royal or shire level already regulates multi-guilding, then the contents of those will have precedence over the contents of the local territorial regulation. Royal Law forbids subjects from holding any memberships in any foreign groups without the knowledge of the authorities.


-For the aggravated battery, Faeran Stonewall is to pay a fine of 150 gold to Zakiyya Ajam.

The defendant is to pay the fine within 7 days. Use the local authorities as an intermediary so that they can confirm the transaction. The court will only consider the fine paid after either the plaintiff or a local court officer confirms the payment.

Sub Signum Rex.

http://duchyofwessex.org/forum/attac...tachmentid=612

The fine has not been paid within the time limit, and is hereby doubled to 300 gold with a new time limit of 7 days from now, as per common law.

The court has not received any form of confirmation that the doubled fine has been paid within the allotted time limit.

Faeran Stonewall is hereby exiled from the Kingdom of Hyperion for failing to pay her fine as per common law regarding Judicial Process in the Realm.