MilkCrack:

Thank you for your response, counsellor. However, it appears that you have filed an answer to a civil complaint, while this case is actually criminal in nature. This mistake is understandable, as the prosecutor has also incorrectly titled this complaint as a civil one. Before proceeding, I request the following clarifications from the prosecutor:

1. Please confirm that this is indeed a criminal case.
2. How long would the defendant be in jail if they had waited out the entire timer?
3. How much of this time has the defendant already served?

To the Honorable Judge MilkCrack,

Response to Question 1: Confirmation of Case Being Criminal in Nature

I, Matthew Romanus, hereby confirm that this case is indeed a criminal matter. Pursuant to Section 4.1(a) of the Criminal Code, Krix stands accused of committing multiple counts of robbery and murder. I request that the court treat this case as a criminal proceeding, with all attendant rights and procedures applicable thereto.

Response to Question 2: Potential Jail Time

Regarding the potential jail time if convicted, the Criminal Code specifies the following penalties for 12 counts of robbery and 1 counts of murder: jailed for 725 minutes and fined for $50 dollars. They can also be fined for each charge of robbery up to 1.5 the amount stolen. Since the prosecution does not know how much has been stolen, we have opted not to seek a fine.

There is no cap as far as I am aware to how long the defendant can be jailed for. The plugin gave them a 1 hour and 30 minute jail sentence upon apprehension and arrest. This may be the limit.

Response to Question 3: Time Served

I am currently unable to get time served, but I believe that the jail time has exceeded 30 minutes.

I request that the court take these facts into consideration when determining an appropriate sentence for Krix should he be found guilty.


Brief Regarding Prosecution:

To the Honorable Milkcrack,

The Prosecution respectfully submits this brief in support of its Prayer for Relief, seeking a reasonable and justified punishment for the Defendant’s crimes.

Under Section 4.1 of the Criminal Code, The alleged crimes' punishment is more than 30 minutes. This is because the Defendant’s actions matches the profile of the crimes that we allege and the necessitate a more stringent sentence. We acknowledge that the Criminal Code permits imprisonment “up to 60 minutes of jail per instance” for Robbery under Section 1.6. In this instance, the Defendant is charged with 12 counts of Robbery, which cumulatively amounts to 725 minutes of jail time (or the cap given by plugin or staff limitations), which is justified by the statutory limits. Additionally, to protect the public given the ongoing alleged crime spree that the defendant may have committed; the AIPD, authorized by 4.1(a) of the criminal code, detained the defendant after they had been "prosecuted" through the filing of this criminal complaint. We argue that the Defendant’s imprisonment is necessary to uphold justice and deter future criminal behavior. 

WHEREFORE, the Prosecution respectfully requests that this Honorable Court consider the guiding principles of law and the statutory limits set by the Criminal Code in determining the appropriate punishment for the Defendant’s crimes, and grant the relief sought.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew Romanus

Just a quick edit as I did not catch this before going to bed.

"I, Matthew Romanus, hereby confirm that this case is indeed a criminal matter. Pursuant to Section 4.1(a) of the Criminal Code, Krix stands accused of committing multiple counts of robbery and murder." Is supposed to be "I, Matthew Romanus, hereby confirm that this case is indeed a criminal matter. Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Criminal Code, Krix stands accused of committing multiple counts of robbery and murder."

Alright, thank you for confirming.

The defence is hereby requested to submit an answer to the criminal complaint, including a plea and any applicable defences. Please do so by May the 25th, 23:00 GMT+2 at the latest

Regarding the arguments in the civil answer to the complaint requesting a motion to dismiss:

As the state points out under criminal code section 4.1:

In any instance where a crime could result in a fine exceeding $1,000 or a jail sentence of 30 minutes or more, a prosecutor must handle the case.
  a. While police may detain someone for an alleged crime under this category, the individual must be prosecuted within the statute of limitations.

Based on the facts presented, it appears the state detained the accused for a maximum of 1 hour and 30 minutes and followed up with a prosecution within the statute of limitations.

Therefore, I see no fault with the police's handling of this case and am not granting the motion to dismiss.

As for the matter of compensation, if the accused is found to have spent too much time in jail at the end of this trial, this is a civil matter between the accused and the state and will not be decided in this criminal trial.

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Your honor, the states handling of this case has been farcical - to continue with this case and not dismiss it after it was filled as a civil case and my client dragged through the streets is deeply unfair to my client. My client deserves a fair trial and continuing to allow the state to make mistakes and have them be handwaved while my client suffered in jail for an hour and a half is a deep imbalance of power. 

In their argument the state only mentions half of 'criminal code section 4.1:', as I raised in my response the full section is as follows:

I have emboldened, underlined and highlighted in red the relevant line of the Criminal Code to these events. Police may apply the punishment without a trial if the punishment is less that the amount described in 4.1, punishment was applied before the trial had even started (As a judge had not taken up the case) your honor DO NOT let this precedent stand that the police, upon filling charges, can take ANY actions. The law is very clear in section 'b.' that they can only apply the punishment without a trial if it is less than the amount described. 

Under this ruling the punishments for corruption could be taken by Police without it having to go to trial, the Police could quite literally accuse you of corruption your honor and legally remove you from your position straight away. Please your honor, do not let this section of the law go ignored.

Although the law prohibits police from imposing punishment before a trial, it also explicitly permits the detention of individuals accused of a crime before trial in the subsection prior. Therefore, I am denying your motion to dismiss and uphold the previous decision.

Please submit your response to the complaint in the timeframe previously established.

Answer to Criminal Complaint:

Your honor, 

In the face of this horrific miscarriage of justice your honor with the continuation of this case, the Defence wishes to submit a plea of Not Guilty. 

 Parties:

1. Plaintiff: The Royal Colony of the Azalea Isles, lead by prosecutor Matthew Romanus

2. Defendant: Krix, represented by the DouCo Legal Firm

Direct Response to Complaint:

1) The Defence REFUTES the following: The defendant, whom at all points in this complaint, is a citizen of the Royal Colonies. - Krix considers himself to be a 'Sovereign Citizen' and a native to Azalea Isles, he refuses the idea that he is a citizen under the authority of the Crown. He is waiving his right under the 'Mandate for the Isles' to '1. The right to citizenship upon entering the country.', however as one of the 'people of Azalea Isles' he is still entitled to be protected by the rest of the rights. Krix is waiving his right to citizenship just as one can waive their right to not self-incriminate. 

2) The Defence REFUTES the following: At some point, the defendant had robbed multiple people. - The Prosecution provides no evidence to prove that multiple persons were robbed, they just post a screenshot that Krix is wanted for 12 counts of robbery, if these robberies did occur (Which for all we know they did not) there is not reason to believe that more than one person was robbed. 

3) The Defence REFUTES the following: The defendant knowingly took money from people. - The Prosecution provides no evidence to support this in anyway, there is no evidence to prove the fact that money was taken. There is only a screenshot which states that Krix is "Wanted for: murder (1x), robbery (12x)", furthermore the Prosecution provides no evidence of motive, knowledge of events, or comprehension that Krix was aware of these actions.

4) The Defence REFUTES the following: The Criminal Code stipulates this action to be illegal under 1.5 Robbery: It shall be illegal to take, steal, or come into adverse possession of any item, monies, material, papers, property, or any other real or intangible object from any person, legal entity, organization, or the government; excluding Azalea Isle’s bank. - The Prosecution has not proved that the actions taken amount to this charge. 

Motion to Strike:

The Defence motions to strike the following section & the subsequent punishments attached:

Krix, whom is the defendant, in violation of the Criminal Code (see https://www.cityrp.org/forum/topic/17-criminal-code/), committed 1.1 Murder because they killed 1 time(s).

We request this as during their filing they provide no 'Factual Allegations' that Krix committed a murder, instead only providing allegations that robberies were committed. We in the Defence are unable to defend against the charge if we are unaware of the events of the alleged murder, it is entirely possible that Krix was acting in self defence during the event in question however because the Prosecution does not provide any allegations on the matter we are unable to even know what scenario they are referring to - thus making a defence impossible. 

Verification:

I, The_Donuticus, hereby affirm that the allegations in the answer AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the defendant’s knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.

Thank you for your response. We can now move on to trial.

If either party wishes to request an in-game trial please say so within the next 24 hours. (by 7 pm 27th of May GMT+1).

Otherwise, the prosecution is required to submit their opening statement within the next 48 hours. (by 7 pm 28th of May GMT + 1).

The prosecution would not mind doing an ingame trial.

We do not want an ingame trial. 

Furthermore we submitted a motion to strike your honor? We have not been able to respond to the charges of murder by the Prosecution because of their failure to file any factual allegations regarding the murder charge, we cannot proceed to our opening statements as we have not yet been given full reciprocal discovery.

We ask that the court delays the presentation of opening statements until after this has been ruled on.

Since not all parties agree, we will not have an in-game trial.

As for the ruling on the motion to strike. I agree with the defence, the factual allegation that a murder has taken place is missing. Therefore the prosecution will have 48 hours to amend the complaint to include this or the murder charge will be stricken. (Please also include as many details as possible, once closing statements begin no additional evidence or facts may be presented).  After doing so the prosecution should submit their opening statement. Please be done with both by 11 pm 29th of May GMT+1.