Assize

"Let it be known that not only does Spaw have no regard for the Common Law, but he has no remorse or regret for having broken it. I would like to add this to the evidence."

-13:16:03- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> Desti, if you want me out of the guild, THAT badly. Just say it. I'll quit.
-13:16:05- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> lol.
-13:16:30- <Destinova|AFK> I'd prefer if you just behaved yourself.
-13:17:52- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> Nah Desti, I know you want me kicked from Wessex.
-13:17:56- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> Am I right?
-13:18:09- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> I'm that annoying 12 year old in the CS Pub server where you had the chance with admin, you'd ban in aheart beat.
-13:18:16- <Destinova|AFK> No, I would really just prefer it if you could behave.
-13:18:47- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> But honestly, this thread, doesn't mean shit to me. I'm sorry to say that. If you think this thread is going to change my ways, it isn't. As for behaving myself, yeah. I suppose I can work on it.
-13:22:23- <Destinova|AFK> I don't understand what you're saying.
-13:24:49- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> I'm saying that, if you think this thread/trial makes a big deal to me. It honestly doesn't. I'm might try change my ways of how I've been influenced for sometime now, but you will probably hardly see the difference with the usage of the word 'gay/fag'.
-13:26:32- <[WSX]SpawKindrid> If the thread is to try and humiliate me to other Duchy/DF memembers, its not going to work because I wouldn't care what they think.

This is correct. This log took place about 5 minutes ago. I said what I said and I will stand by it. Let the punishment be sentenced. If I hurt Finnigan's feelings, thats just too bad I suppose. I've been verbally attacked by yourself too Destinova, don't hear me complaining.

As for caring for Common Laws, Yeah I do. But in this case, I don't. For such a small thing that isn't even a big deal which has been totally blown out of proportion.

If I wanted to join a G-Rated Clan/Guild like my Siblings and Dad do for Day of Defeat, I would've all ready. Which gladly I haven't and never will.

In the future, these trials need to be conducted by sheriffs who decide which evidence is admissable and prevent the trial from becoming a personal issue. In the absence of a presiding sheriff, I will step in now to preside over the remainder of the trial.

The purpose of calling 6 other Wessex members to be jurors is so that the sense of following the gaming clan rules is something enforced and held accountable by players of the same rank as oneself rather than what may appear to be arbitrary punishments handed out by guild leadership. Also, the chance to let many vote on whether someone did in fact break the clan rules helps rule out the possibility of someone being singled out for personal reasons by one high ranking member.

I'm not saying that is what is happening here, and because Destinova is a moderator of our IRC he has some powers like a sheriff. However, since Destinova is taking the role of prosecution in this matter, we're going to need a neutral judge. Because I have a bit too much influence over things, usually it's best if sheriffs do this, as they are also usually freemen and not so highly ranked as cabinet members.

For now though, let us say that the evidence has been presented and the 6 should post their decisions. You are not passing a sentence, only responding on whether you feel the two are guilty or not guilty. If guilty, I shall issue sentencing which will follow the guidelines posted in the Common Law, appropriate to the nature and level of the breech of the rules.

Let this be my closing statement.


In my past online communities, which some of them I'm not proud of being in(myg0t, 4chan, DeathLegion, Face of Mankind, CS/eSports Communities). I was always influenced through the guilds/clans/communities I was in because of them, we didn't have much chat restrictions. Death Legion/FoM Community probably made the biggest impact on this. Being ex-DL member for years, and those inside the Duchy know what I'm talking about. Death Legion/FoM basically harassed each other. It was alright to harass each other 24/7. Sure nobody liked being the target, but it happened anyways; in other words you could've called us savages. But through this new experience which I've never gone through before nor' been called out like this, I now have to realize that the Duchy of Wessex isn't full of people that are savages like my other communities; but people who expect respect in their stay here inside the Duchy. As someone just recently told me, "We don't want word to go around that Wessex treats new members like this, or that people have to put up with that kind of stuff to be part of the clan.
"; which is right. I made an apology to Finnigan last night but he never received it, or saw it in his IRC PM. I figured he blew it off after asking him three times for a response and then I continued my defensive/offensive stance on this matter.
To the jury of the court, I've found myself guilty and know what to do now. Its your decision now.

It is my opinion that both defendants are guilty.

I agree with my fellow juror Thyreus -- both are guilty. I would add, as an aside to the defendants, that I find the crime to rest upon the apparent prolonged harassment, not the exercise of free speech.

I find both defendants to be guilty. However I ask Your Grace to take the defendants' reasoning and past into consideration when selecting the punnishment.

((IE. I have seen worse jokes thrown around and yes, this is the Internet after all, even if I don't personally agree with such behaviour.
But I still say guilty because I think that what crossed the line was when Finnegan (to my interpretation) was told that he didn't deserve respect because he is new, as well as the ridiculing following.))

He stands up before all present and clears his throat, then addresses the audience gathered.

"Proof beyond a reasonable doubt leaves me with an abiding conviction that the charge is true, therefore I find the defendants guilty."

Both defendants; guilty.

I would raise the question to the Duke whether the jury should be truly compromised of, "peers of the plaintiff and of the defendant." The defendants being Spaw (archer) and Caine (trial member) and the plaintiff being Finnigan (Trial member).

I would seek clarification and justification for the specific choice of jury so that our common law can either be clarified or amended.