View source for SD v dominax273 2025 Crim 3

[[Category:Case Law|2025-02-02]] [[Category:Criminal Cases|2025-02-02]] [[Category:Court Cases from 2025|2025-02-02]]
[[Category: Case Law Concerning Hate Speech]]
= SD v dominax273 2025 Crim 3<ref>Originally crim 7</ref>=

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|-
! Date of judgment
! 2nd February 2025
|-
| Judge
| Judge Tirado
|-
| Charges
| 2 charges of First Degree Hate Speech (Article 53a §1 of the Criminal Code)
|-
| Verdict
| Guilty of 2 charges of First Degree Hate Speech
|-
| Sentence
| 18 month ban
|-
| Applicable persuasive precedent
| The Terms of Service may allow for things the State does not, in which case the State takes priority, 6 The soft version of the “N-word”  and its variations also promotes hate, 4 Reaffirms ''SD v Mooklyn'' 2023 Crim 1 8
|}
== JUDGMENT by Judge Tirado==
== Introduction ==

'''[1].''' The defendant, dominax273, is charged with two (2) counts of First Degree Hate Speech, specifically, use of the racial slur “niggers” for the first count, and “blackies” for the second.
== On the first count ==

'''[2].''' The prosecution makes the argument that no matter the context of who says “niggers” or any of its variations, use of the word is demeaning. The defense argues that as the defendant is not using the term in such a way that it would be demeaning as the defendant has expressed anti-racist views elsewhere and is a black man.

'''[3].''' Article 53a. §3. and §3.1. of the Criminal Code says (§3. Starts here)“ … a person shall always be considered as submitting, posting, or relaying speech that is upsetting, demeaning, or humiliating about a person’s or a group of person’s protected characteristics if they:”(§3. Ends here)  (§3.1. Starts here) “Use a slur, which is any derogatory or insulting term applied to a group of persons classed by a protected characteristic, …”(§3.1. Ends here) As such the prosecution’s argument is accepted.

'''[4].''' The defense argues that the defendant did not have the intention to cause apprehension or reckless disregard as to if his actions would cause apprehension. This court believes that reckless disregard has been found due to the seven (7) unique pieces of evidence showing the defendant using variations on “nigger.” This figure of seven (7) includes variants on “nigga.” ''SD v Mooklyn 2023 Crim 1'' maintains that the soft version of “nigger,” that is “nigga” and its variations also promotes hate.
== On the second count ==

'''[5].''' Similar arguments are made regarding the use of “blackies.” It is this court's opinion that the same logic as applied in the first count is used for the second.
== Regarding Terms of Service ==

'''[6].''' The defense makes the argument that the Terms of Service of Discord allows for the use of “reclaimed language.” While this court agrees with the defense that the Terms of Service of wherever the State of SimDemocracy is hosted do supersede the laws, as the binding precedent of ''In re Restraining Order Act 2019 SDSC 1'' has set, this court maintains that just because the Terms of Service of a platform allows for something, does not mean that the State of SimDemocracy cannot ban things platforms elect to allow.
== Verdict ==

'''[7].''' This Court finds the defendant, dominax273, guilty on both counts of First Degree Hate Speech, and sentences the defendant to an eighteen (18) month ban.


==Citations==
<references />