SD v adeacentpear 2025 Crim 14: Difference between revisions
From SimDemocracy Archives
Created page with "Category:Case Law {| class="wikitable" |- ! Prosecutor ! State of SimDemocracy |- | Prosecuting Attorney | Confused Bartender (mrgamerboy) |- | Defendant | Niko Belic (adeacentpear) |- | Defendant's attorney | Aerospace Enjoyer (busiedcomb) |- | Judge | Average787enjoyer (intelligentdonut) |- | Courtroom | [https://discord.com/channels/554769523635650580/1112746860906545172/1341172025477169192 #public-court-5] |- | Criminal Complaint | [https://docs.google.com/docum..." |
m IntelligentDonut moved page SD v adacentpear to SD v adacentpear 2025 Crim 14: Wrong case - going to delete other page |
(No difference)
| |
Revision as of 02:29, 16 March 2025
| Prosecutor | State of SimDemocracy |
|---|---|
| Prosecuting Attorney | Confused Bartender (mrgamerboy) |
| Defendant | Niko Belic (adeacentpear) |
| Defendant's attorney | Aerospace Enjoyer (busiedcomb) |
| Judge | Average787enjoyer (intelligentdonut) |
| Courtroom | #public-court-5 |
| Criminal Complaint | CC |
| Evidence | Evidence |
Verdict
[1] The Prosecution provided evidence of multiple everyone pings by the Defendant which were independently verified, happening one right after the other
[2] The Defense argued that the defendant did not have Everyone permissions and that the actions in question were done in jest
[3] The court notes that according to SD v Mooklyn [2021] Crim 4, jest is not a defense
[4] The court rejects the defense's argument that the Defendant had no knowledge of the everyone ping ability, as a reasonable person would have checked the easily accessible permissions in the server settings before performing such a risky act
[5] The court finds the Defendant guilty on all counts and sentences them to a 3 week mute
