Commonwealth V. Unfallious

Good evening, your honour, members of the Court. I'm Chancellor Everestopia, and I’ll be the lead prosecutor in this case.

We begin this trial today, because of Unfallious and his crimes against the Commonwealth and it's constitution. 

Unfallious has now violated the the Communications Code (Article 1, of the Constitution) on multiple occasions and has also been given warnings about his verbal behaviour before.

(It should be known any mention of Dalek or The Dalek Paradigm is Unfallious's past nation and is thus referring to Unfallious)

I shall proceed with charges as ordered.

---

1. Violation of the Communications Code (Multiple counts)
   
- 1A: Threatening a standing Chancellor (Vladovaskia)
        
Article 1 of the Constitution clearly states "Stating with caution that all individuals are to respect others at all times, whether it be during elections, debates, or even general conversation". Unfallious has without violated this in a conversation with former Chancellor, Vladovaskia. As shown below.
Paying attention to all, but specifically to the highlighted sections. Unfallious is in clear violation. The words *"not going public with this" would imply Unfallious was in the mind set of purposely setting out to tarnish the former Chancellor's reputation. Why, this surly is not being respectful to others your honour. Why would one wish to do such a thing, except for having malicious intentions.

To build upon this, *"Are you worried about something, Vlad?" does carry sly a tone of mockery towards the former Chancellor. This is clearly intended in a provocative manner to snare the former Chancellor into quickly replying with comment of dispute. As it would anyone, should such methods of trickery be used.  



*In the past case of Nama V. CFN it was found that fighting words are clarified as threats. To which threats are against the Communications Code.

The former Chancellor, Vladovaskia claimed that this encounter with Unfallious caused him to be and I quote "Fearful for the security of the CFN" due to the shear amount of twisting and manipulation of wording, while continuing to pursue unreasonable questioning of government officials whilst they were simply trying to prepare our beloved Commonwealth for the Cabinet Election. Thus causing disruption to the process and normal procedure of election preparation, which it's self can be an already stressful time without harassment from a provocative member.

- 1B: Disrespecting personal ideologies and 1C: Personally insulting fellow members of the CFN.

Once again, we come back to Unfallious purposely being provocative. In this instance purposely being argumentative for the sake of doing so and disrespecting personal ideologies and a clearly insulting Vladovaskia by stating what he said was "Stupid". As shown in evidence specimens Evidence #1.


It is clearly shown that Vladovaskia and Jaslandia were conversing in a pleasant friendly manner when Unfallious provokes an argument regarding Vladovaskia's view on party political systems. This, which happened to have no connection to Unfallious. Which can only be seen as a personal attack upon Vladovaskia's personal view's, is it not? Further more, this again is not respecting others at all times. 

Vladovaskia went on to reference our fair constitution, specifically Article I, Section II (showing respect to others at all times). To which Unfallious's response was well and truly below par. As shown below.


Unfallious shows no respect to Vladovaskia's views, furthermore the shear disrespect towards constitution. "Oh boohoo go cry me a damn river", This is without doubt the words of someone who shows little to no respect towards his fellow nations views nor the ways of the CFN. 

---

2. Suspected citizenship and voter fraud.

Article 9 of the Constitution does so state "II. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, their NS nations and puppets and property against unreasonable searches and seizures and questioning shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, or means of national security, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

This may take some time your honour, please bear with me.

It is strongly believed that Unfallious has been attempting to manipulate the systems of the CFN for some time now, through the use of puppets states. It is known that Unfallious has many puppet nations. He has said so himself as seen below.


"That I regularly log onto" this would imply that the mentioned 19 are a mere few to which he uses often, does it not?

Now we move onto the suspected puppets. Unfallious has a strong connection to the Reformist Party, this is commonly known.
Does that connection stretch so far as for him to create "puppet members" to which, would allow the party to rise in influence? 

You may possibly recall the following nations, Vnetanl, Tinolor, Mnorior and A Better Name. All of which happened to be members of the Reformist Party at some point.

The nations can be found below, however it will be noticed Mnorior is missing due to problems opening the file. It will be added later, your honour.


For example, when the government revoked citizenship from all those without WA, it of course effected these suspected nations it was A Better Name who spoke up out of nowhere to back Unfallious/Dalek in the argument that his party was being "discriminated against". As shown below:


-Vnetanl, Tinolor and Mnorior never had WA status the whole of their existence, nor did they engage in conversation on the regional message board. They all happened to appear in the party. Not mention they shared a national motto and their population figures were the exact same and to top it off, when the party member were looked into for WA reasons as mentioned above. After they were looked at huge familiarities between Tinolor and Mnorior were noticed and Unfallious/Dalek was later accused of puppetry and shortly after the accusations they Both Tinolor and Mnorior ceased to exist as the same time.


Puppets?  Sure is looking that way.

Even Minister of Internal Affairs Sulania said "I'm firmly believe he is using puppetry to manipulate the system". As shown below. 


It is commonly known that "Next Generation Alliance" from here on in referred to as "NGA" was the predecessor to the CFN. Former members of the NGA now members of the CFN didn't wish to let the region die after the move to the CFN. So, a few options were tried in order from seeing the former region die. Ultimately it was decided upon  to become a "Museum" for heritage reasons and would be used for nothing more.

Unfallious/Dalek authored the NGA Decommission Bill for the region to become a museum.

4. Suspicion of treason against the Commonwealth of Free Nations.

The Commonwealth Terrorists Act states the following,

IV:

Establishes a roster of terrorist nations who are unproductive to the Commonwealth and pose a threat to stability and society. Evidence shall be added to these nations as discovered. The roster shall be maintained by the Chancellor and Lord-Chancellor.

VIII:

Defines terrorist action as: threats, coups, spreading classified information, treason, attacks on the security of the Commonwealth, and military or political action against the stability of the Commonwealth.

It has been established that Unfallious has no respect for the voting system and is a clear threat to stability through the use of puppet nations in order to gain political influence over the CFN, with the suspected goal of total power over the government. This is of course a violation to The Commonwealth Terrorists Act, section IV. As stated above.

It has also long been suspected that the use of threats have been used by Unfallious in order to push forward with a suspected personal agenda. During the time of the "Parliamentary Head Establishment Act" was going through parliament. This of course being a bill that would give his party much influence over the parliament. His party of which, he holds a permanent leadership position (As shown below) that can not be removed from him. Even if the party members wanted him removed. Furthermore the bill was sent for judicial review for legal complications and was later deemed unconstitutional by the now Chief Justice Vlad.  


Moving on, previously mentioned suspicions were confirmed when a former Reformist Party member, AOS informed the Chief Justice that Unfallious would issue threats to members throughout the party. He would do so in order to make them vote how he personally saw fit on bills, amendments and in elections.


"Rules he has for the party doesn't really give me a choice". AOS was asked about said rules, to which he replied:


Later AOS messaged the following:

Unfallious is being represented by Humpheria Unfallious Jaslandia LLP.

Of which Humpheria will be representing and will deliver the opening statement.

Hello, everyone. Your Honor, the Prosecution, various spectators.

Firstly, I would like to thank the Prosecution on his most excellently structured case. The organization is uncanny and makes it very easy to argue each point individually.

Now, on to the opening statements.
-

I rise today in defense of Unfallious, who, for better or worse as personal opinion holds, has been an active and dedicated member of the region for a reasonable amount of time.

Today he has been charged with four charges altogether, although the Prosecution has apparently morphed Charge #3 and Charge #4 together and has not addressed #3 specifically, I will.

- 1

I must point out that it would be insufficient for the Prosecution to simply make general blanket statements such as "Once again, we come back to Unfallious purposely being provocative". Further, this Court surely does not take personal assumptions into account when making an informed, fair decision. Assumptive statements that the Prosecution has already made, such as "Why would one wish to do such a thing, except for having malicious intentions." I cite this because there is no way that the Prosecution can prove beyond plausible doubt that this was my client's intent, which would be in direct combat with a fact-based argument. Another example would be "due to the shear amount of twisting and manipulation of wording, while continuing to pursue unreasonable questioning of government officials whilst they were simply trying to prepare our beloved Commonwealth for the Cabinet Election." My client made those statements after feeling attacked by those aforementioned officials. I will address this more in response to the second charge.

But now to the specific conversation in question. Your Honor, seeing past the broad statements of rhetoric and politicking by the Prosecution, one can see that this instance is not an insult directly unto the offended party. The supposedly offensive content was, in fact, an insult of the belief, not the nation. When my client said "When you say stupid things, you should expect a retort." it was, in fact, NOT a violation of the communication code. While it was not said in good taste, it was not being disrespectful to the offended party. It was a poor choice of words categorizing the THING not the PERSON. He never called Vladovaskia stupid, not did he ever call anything about Vladovaskia stupid. He categorized a THING. If anything, you see Your Honor, Vladovaskia was the one that was in violation of the communication code and rather violently disrespected my client.

Vladovaskia's Offense:
i.imgur.com/1zMcFj8.png

Evidence 1:
i.imgur.com/2pS1BQk.png

Above is the Communications Code of the Commonwealth of Free Nations. I point Your Honor's attention to the Section 3 of the Code itself. "... he or she must immediately inform the offending party." You see, sir, the first charge cannot hold up. My client was not informed by the offended party, he was simply tossed in to a swirling vat of public opinion that had turned on him due to this misunderstanding. Similarly as a Defendant not properly Mirandized must be acquitted, so too must my client be on the grounds that he was not properly informed.

Thus, the first charge falls.

-2

This, Your Honor, is nothing more than blatant manipulation of the Justice System based on a past grudge. The only thing that the Prosecution has provided was a list of nations that have no connection to my client other than holding membership in the same political party. Again I cite where the Prosecution attempts to use rhetoric and opinion to sway the Honorable Justice's opinion. "Puppets? Sure is looking that way." That and quoting my client simply stating that he, in fact, holds puppets. Unless the act of having puppets is against the law, which it is not and would be a violation of my client's sovereignty, there is no case here.

I question how simply listing nations that were discriminated against through government overreach and intervention, which my client maintains was a result of a personal vendetta by said officials, is germane to the charges. The burden of proof lies with the Prosecution to correlate these nations. These nations had their citizenship revoked on a dime with no probable cause other than a suspicion from two government officials that they were used. These suspicions were not backed up by fact. Like the Prosecution's case on the second charge, they were entirely conjecture. I state again that this Court must deal in fact and reason other than rhetoric and conjecture, thus the Honorable Justice must see that this charge falls.

-3 and 4

The prosecution seems to have morphed the third and fourth charges and addressing them as one, despite that violation of decorum, I will continue.

I remind the Honorable Justice that the events in question did not occur recently, but in fact in the last calendar year. My question is why is this being brought to the Courts now if the Prosecution is so certain that this was of the utmost importance to the security of the region? I believe that this further accents the culture of manipulation of the Courts that is being employed by the Prosecution. This Court should not be a place to punish the innocent for past grudges and disputes.

But that aside, I point out that the Prosecution has failed to outline exactly what treasonous acts were perpetuated by my client. He cites only the "hostile" takeover of the NGA. I cite the NGA Decommission Act.

i.imgur.com/czsenk8.png

Where in this document is there any clause to warrant this charge? It states no where the illegality of such a "hostile takeover". This charge does not exist in the legal realm of the Commonwealth and is a fabrication of the legal system by the Prosecution with the express intent on adding so many charges to my client to increase the likelihood of conviction. Even further outlining the manipulation of the courts. Reminding the Honorable Justice that this Court MUST continue to deal in fact and fairness, this charge falls.

Your Honor, I urge you look past the rhetoric, conjecture, and manipulative exploitations of the Prosecution to see that my client is not deserving of a conviction and that any such conviction would deteriorate the integrity of this Court. Do not give in to the pressure to convict an innocent man. Do not carry out the end result of this unfair grudge on him. I urge you most of all, Your Honor, to follow what has been given to you to make a fair, and just decision.

Thank you, and Long Live the Commonwealth!

I have viewed a copy of that telegram, sans redactions, and I can assure you that the omitted lines were purely personal in nature, and concerned an entirely different topic, with absolutely no pertinence to regional politics, citizenship, or the defendant, Mr. Unfallious. The content of those lines is merely conversation between two private parties, and would not affect the case in the slightest, so it will not be released.

Moving on, this court is dismissed for a recess until Friday, at which time the prosecution should call their first witness, examine said witness, followed by the cross examination by the defense. Witnesses and any evidence must be submitted to me beforehand. Understood?

I reiterate to the Court that the defense will be available tonight and tomorrow morning, but not tomorrow evening.

My apologies. The prosecution has once again requested to postpone. We'll reconvene tomorrow, if that works for the defense.

The Defense is present.