Hello, Pzk here. The reason I made the vote previous to this one was to administer a more serious punishment for his crimes than the one given (1 minute ban). The reason for this being that the problem never stops or changes, and continues, no matter how many times he is declared guilty. It is stated in the laws that a consistent abuse of a low-punishment offense constitutes a more serious punishment. Jeepdino has abused on the chat many times, and if there are any witnesses that feel like they have to give their accounts, please do so. If we treat this like an isolated incident, out of context with what his previous crimes have been, the legal punishment would be a warning. The previous vote was to figure out whether or not to take this abuse in context or out of context.
Plaintiff(s): Superkiller (possibly Nighthawk)
Moderator (Judge): Nickman101
Accusation: Abuse of chat powers by defendant Jeepdino.
I was trying to get Nighthawk’s attention, (he was afk) noises weren’t working, so I guested him for a millisecond and re-ownered him, (Like Aj did) he was still afk. Superkiller screamed “ABOOSE. YOU FREAKING ABOOSER” and crap like that. I said, “Shut up, THIS would be abuse” and banned him, then Pzk started doing it, a max of 10 seconds had passed while I argued with Pzk and I unbanned him.
Argumentative Speculation below [to be put in comment]
Also, the Bill of Rights says you can’t put me on trial for the same crime twice. So this must be a isolated incident, or else you’re breaking the law and we need to put YOU on trial. Oh and, last time I checked, YOU were the one that put me on trial, not Nighthawk or Super. Nighthawk wasn’t even there.
[Edit] Ya know what, just demote me if you want, Nick. I don’t really care, it’s obvious I’m not cut out for how the new GSA thinks, I’m too old school and don’t like change. I did my time as the head member, got friends, got enemies, got memories. But now apparently it’s over. I won’t retire, because I refuse to say that I gave up. But apparently Pzk and Banana won’t rest until I’m gone. I have very few
[Nickman101:] The Concept of Double Jeopardy as outlined in the Constitution is that once the court has ruled on a specific incident then you cannot be ruled upon again on the same incident. For example, If I steal Batman from Aj on 9/5/14, and I was ruled innocent, then I cannot be charged again for stealing Batman from Aj on 9/5/14, again. Double Jeopardy doesn’t apply here haha
[Jeep] In my view, that’s exactly what’s going on here though. He wants to use things that were already punished in prior trials to make this trial go worse for me. Sounds like the same thing to me.
[Nickman101:] I am not including any evidence from any past trial nor am I charging you based on your past actions. However, if somebody commits the same crime over and over again, their sentence isn’t the same every single time, their punishments become harsher until the court realizes that such an individual cannot be released to the public and expected to not commit the same crime again, so they usually stick them in jail for a long time. That is one of the reasons why the punishment may be harsher this time if you are found guilty, and it is completely reasonable.
[Jeep] Okay, Pzk seems to be of the opinion that I’m already guilty and this is just some kind of sentencing post, lol. I’ve already given you what’s happened, so it’s your choice, I’m not sure I care either way.
Pzk: It’s obvious that this is an open and shut case. The evidence is right there, and it was abuse, no matter what context you put it in. GSA members are never banned. If by some wild chance you are acquitted, people would still be on your ass, watching you all the time, waiting for that moment to convict you. In a way, no matter the outcome of this trial, the objectives will be met – the abuse will end one way or another.
[Reaper]: A GSA member can be banned only for a short period if he/she breaks a law multiple times. (NOTE: This means more than maybe 4-5 times. [in one day maybe?]).
^ Does anyone have a screenshot of how many times he called me an “abuser”, which could be taken insultingly, thus violating law 1?
[Reaper]: You must have forgetten the “4-5 times in one day” thing. You ban without warning sometimes. Do NOT try and put blame onto me.
^ I never put the blame on you. ._. I meant how many times Superkiller called me an abuser.
[I strongly recommend that this be transferred to comments]
[Eagle613]: Sorry for the disruption. But I need to put out a warning. If I see any more insulting comments towards Jeep I will personally demote you for breaking law 1 and for being an idiot. Thank you.
[Nickman101:] Jeeps punishment will be that he will be membered in the chat for two weeks, his chat powers revoked temporarily. Demoting JEEP would be too far, and banning him for a week would be too harsh as well. I don’t think the current laws on the chat are adequate to meet his punishment, and that this unique punishment will do. Since it’s illegal to create a new law that interferes with an ongoing trial, vote, etc, since this trial is over, I will be editing the chat laws to add for harsher punishments such as demotion.
[Jeep]: Let the Jeep abuse commence. 😛