please remove UNAWARE from this, that basically removes interpretation of criminal rules entirely.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:23 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, here's a proto of my criminal justice reform. Again, D Margaux, > sorry for the duplication of effort. I borrowed one of your ideas (the > one about the time when tardiness happens needing to be defined), so > I've added you as a coauthor. > > -Aris > > --- > Title: Criminal Justice Reform Act > Adoption index: 3.0 > Author: Aris > Co-authors: D Margaux > > > [Our criminal justice system has problems. In short, it isn't designed > to be extensible. Not only are the criteria under which a person is guilty > a bit of a mess, but it is also difficult to add additional sentences, > other than the assignment of blots, to the current rules. There is > also no uniform process for the Referee to report why the accused isn't > guilty. Finally, our judicial system maintains a pre-zombie split between > a sentence imposed by the referee and one imposed pursuant to > finger-pointing, > a distinction that is no longer meaningful. > > In short, I rewrote our judicial system almost from scratch. It operates > in much > the same way as before, but I've cleaned up the implementation to be much > more > streamlined. This also should open the way for criminal CFJs, if we ever > want to > bring them back, but on its own I think it represents a significant > improvement.] > > Repeal Rules 2478, 2479, 2557, and 2531. > > Amend Rule 2152, "Mother, May I?", by appending at the end of the first > paragraph the text > "Every action or inaction that is not explicitly declared by the rules > to be impermissible is implicitly permissible, but not necessarily > possible." > > Create a new Power 1.7 Rule entitled "Criminal Cases", with the following > text: > > A player CAN by announcement, accuse (syn. indict) a specified player > (the Defendant), naming an alleged violation of the rules by that person > (the Act), and thereby initiating a criminal case against them. However, > a > player SHALL NOT make a accusation of which e believes the Defendant > not to be guilty without explaining emself in the same message; to do so > is the Class-5 Crime of Witch-Hunting. For the purposes of these > definitions, > failure to take a required action before the appropriate deadline > constitutes > a violation occurring at the deadline to complete the action. > > The Referee is by default the Adjudicator for all criminal cases. > When a player, other than the Arbitor, accuses a player of > abuse of the criminal justice system, explicitly citing this > provision, the Arbitor is the Adjudicator of the resulting criminal > case. > > After the initiation of a criminal case, the Adjudicator CAN once > determine the verdict from among the possible verdicts specified by the > rules. E SHALL investigate the allegation and, in a timely fashion, > conclude > the investigation by delivering what e believes the correct verdict > in the case. If the verdict is manifestly incorrect, the attempt > to award the verdict fails. > > If the Referee issues three or more manifestly incorrect > verdicts in a given week, any player CAN, with two support, issue a > writ of Impartial Arbitration Restoration, immediately making the > position > of Referee vacant. When a writ of Impartial Arbitration Restoration is > issued, the ADoP SHALL initiate an election for the Referee within a > timely > fashion. > > > Create a new Power 1.7 Rule entitled "Guilt", with the following text: > > The correct verdict is the first appropriate listed verdict. A > verdict is appropriate if and only if the conditions specified for > it are met. The Adjudicator is ENCOURAGED to list any verdicts, > other than the correct one, which e believes to be appropriate. > The possible verdicts are as follows: > > - DISCHARGE, appropriate if the Defendant has already been found guilty > and sentenced for the the same Act. > > - PERMISSIBLE, appropriate if the purported Act is LEGAL. > > - INNOCENT, appropriate if the Defendant more likely than not did not > commit the Act. > > - JUSTIFIED, if the Defendant was, through no fault of eir own, required > to commit the Act by a rule of power greater than or equal to that > of the rule declaring the act ILLEGAL. > > - INCULPABLE, appropriate if the the Defendant could not reasonably have > been expected to avoid committing the Act (for instance, because the > Act > was made on the Defendant's behalf without eir consent). > > - UNAWARE, appropriate if the Defendant could reasonably have believed > that the Act was LEGAL at the time e committed it. > > - UNTIMELY, appropriate if more than 14 days had passed since the Act was > committed at the time the criminal case was initiated. > > - GUILTY/S, where S is a valid sentence, appropriate in all other cases > provided that any additional conditions for S are met and S is not > a manifestly unjust (either by harshness or leniency) penalty for the > given > offense. > > Create a new Power 1.7 Rule entitled "Sentencing", with the following text: > > The base value for a given violation, is B if the violation is described > by > the rules as a Class-B Crime, and 2 otherwise. N is any integer > between 0 and 2X the base value. This value should be determined as > follows: > > - By default, N is equal to the base value. > > - N SHOULD be reduced to the degree that the violation is a > minor, accidental, and/or inconsequential infraction. > > - N SHOULD be increased to the degree that the violation is > willful, profitable, egregious, or an abuse of an official > position. > > The possible sentences are as follows: > > - INFAMY N, N blots are created in the Defendant's possession. > > - SHAME N, N blots are created in the Defendant's possession. The > Adjudicator > may optionally state a list of no more than ten words in the same > message > where e pronounces the sentence. The Defendant CAN once, in a timely > fashion after the sentence, publish a formal apology of at least 100 > words, > including the listed words, if any, to expunge N blots from emself. > > - PARDON, appropriate if and only if extraordinary circumstances > make any other sentence inequitable or another rule states > that a penalty is inappropriate under the current conditions. > > > Amend Rule 991, Calls for Judgement, by appending as a new paragraph at the > end of the rule > > "If a person, otherwise required to take a given action, refrains from > doing > so while awaiting the outcome of a CFJ relevant to eir ability > or obligation to take the action, punishment is generally not > appropriate." > -- >From V.J. Rada
