SD v thefinalseason 2025 Crim 21
SD v thefinalseason 2025 Crim 21
| Date of judgment | 29th March 2025 |
|---|---|
| Judge | Judge Britz |
| Charges | 1 charge of Hate Speech in the Second Degree (Article 53a, §2 of the Criminal Code) |
| Verdict | Guilty of 1 charge of Hate Speech in the Second Degree |
| Sentence | 3 month ban |
| Applicable persuasive precedent |
|
JUDGMENT by Judge Britz
Introduction
[1] The state has charged the defendant, thefinalseason, with one count of Hate Speech in the Second Degree
On the count of Hate Speech in the Second degree
[2] There was no refutation from the defence that the defendant did say the “n-word” in the message “the anti (censored) deep state”. Instead, the defence first argued that the law does not inherently state the “n-word” is a slur, however, the court does not find this argument compelling in any way. Under Article 53a, §2 of the Criminal Code, a slur is “any derogatory or insulting term applied to a group of persons classed by a protected characteristic.” Precedent, in this case SD v dominax273 [2025] Crim 7, has long been set that affirms the n-word, a historically racist term, is indeed a racial slur that is applied to a protected characteristic, which in this instance is race. The defence then argues that the “n-word”, specifically the “soft” variant of it, which ends in “a” instead of “er”, is a form of linguistic reappropriation. The court once does not agree with this and instead sides with the prosecution in that the n-word has always been a form of hate and cannot be interpreted as anything else. The defence’s argument that the defendant is part of the African-American community is unverifiable due to the nature of being a virtual democracy simulation. Also, it would have no impact on the outcome the court has made today, as the law is applied equally to all members of the State of SimDemocracy.
On the Discord Terms of Service
[3] Like many other cases involving the use of the “n-word”, the defence has made the argument that the Discord Terms of Service allow usage of linguistic reapproriation, citing In re Restraining Order Act [2019] SDSC 1. However, the court reaffirms the logic in SD v dominax273 [2025] Crim 7, in that the Discord Terms of Service do not necessarily give rights but simply set a minimum amount of restrictions that all servers on the platform, including the State of SimDemocracy, must follow. If the converse were true, there would be no need for a Criminal or Civil code, as the Discord Terms of Service would simply be “the law”.
Verdict
[3] The Court has sided with the prosecution in that the defendant unequivocally has said a racial slur that despite being the “soft” variant of the “n-word”, does not constitute linguistic reapproraition. Therefore, the court finds the defendant, thefinalseason, guilty of one count of Hate Speech in the Second Degree, and sentences them to a 3 month ban from the date of arrest.
Note from the Editor: counsel for the defendant wrote a very long series of messages that may be worth reading, but were rejected by the court.
