SD v Dickhead68 2020 Crim 15

SD v Dickhead68 2020 Crim 15

Date of judgment	5th November 2020
Judge	Judge TheMainCharacter
Charges	1 charge of Brigaiding and Raiding (Article 72 of the Criminal Code)
Verdict	Not guilty
Sentence
Applicable persuasive precedent	Prior court proceedings may be cited without being entered as evidence, as long as they do not establish new facts, 2 Lack of Benefit to actions is a contributing factor towards there being proof they didn’t happen, 4 A confession is not by itself proof of a crime having occurred 5

==

Use of past court proceedings as evidence

[1]. The prosecution cited prior court proceedings, namely the evidence used in SD v Dickhead68 Crim 3, without entering it as evidence during the pre-trial.

[2]. Since it is not used to establish new facts, and only bring to the attention of the court facts already established, the court allows this.

Review of the evidence

[3]. The prosecution presents evidence of Iwannakillmyself.com admitting to having raided WeeklyDictator in order to cause a meme war. The accused also admits to being Dickhead.

[4]. The defense questions whether the accused is actually dickhead. The court finds that no reasonable doubt has been raised about the identity of the accused, as their behaviour of declaring themselves to be dickhead is consistent with their past use of alts, and that impersonating dickhead would have no benefit.

[5]. The evidence shows Dickhead admitting to having raided but does not show Dickhead actually raiding. A confession to a crime cannot by itself be taken as proof of the crime, unless the action of claiming itself is criminalised.

[6]. Furthermore, the prosecution has failed to show that the community that was raided reached out to SimDemocracy's officials, which is required by statute (Article 72 of the Criminal Code) for the accused to be convicted of the crime of Brigading and Raiding.

Verdict

[7]. The court finds the accused not guilty of Brigading and Raiding.