Call to Assize: Faeran Stonewall

[Altus Whyte]

Plaintiff, continue and answer each question.

Do so within 24 hours.

[Zakiyya Ajam]

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.

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.

[Altus Whyte]

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.

[Camarro Valkran]

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

[Altus Whyte]

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

Do so within 24 hours.

[Zakiyya Ajam]

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?

[Altus Whyte]

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

[Camarro Valkran]

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.

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.

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

Removed - Objection sustained.

[Faeran Stonewall]

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.

[Altus Whyte]

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.