HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2210.HC] KRIS KRINGLE V. CURLYHOWARD
SUBMISSION 03 NOVEMBER 2022
DOCKET FILE NUMBER
2210.HC
REFERENCE NAME
Kris Kringle V. Curlyhoward
SUBMITTER
Kris Kringle, Election Commissioner
CHARGE
Corruption
CASE LINK
DETERMINATION OF JUSTICIABILITY - DISCUSSION OPEN TO ALL JUSTICES
DISCUSSION RESTRICTED TO JUSTICE GRIFFINDOR (PRESIDING) AND JUSTICE BELSCHAFT (SECONDARY)
Griffindor Today at 10:28 AM
Luckily I checked the forums right when I did.
@Belschaft Kris has submitted a criminal case to the High Court against Curlyhoward on corruption. As the next most senior justice, you are in charge of the administrative aspects of the case: Rules of the High Court
Please let me know ASAP if you need me to take over, I am relatively busy, but I should be able to work some time in here and there as needed.
Kringle Today at 10:32 AM
On that note, I know I’m taking a while importing all the information to the new forum, but once I do (this month, I promise) I hope to also propose a number of simplifications to the case procedure and the formats.
Griffindor Today at 10:32 AM
haha its all good Kris, it will happen in due course
For the record, if I don’t hear back from Bel by around ~a day~ from now, I will take over the admin part of the case.
Belschaft Today at 11:32 AM
Would be best for you to do the admin stuff I think, I’m also very busy
Griffindor Today at 11:33 AM
Good timing on my part again lol
I’ll do the admin stuff
I’ll import the convo we have here into the case thread when I make it. but do you think there is probable cause to the corruption charge? Further, do you think there are other relevant charges that could be levied?
I am not in a position to look at the laws atm, but I believe the case should move forward, at the very least on corruption.
(I’ll post notice of reception also in a couple of hours when I am not on mobile)
Belschaft Today at 11:48 AM
So the TG was sent using stamps
Which means the only thing in question is the pinning of his CoI and whether or not that was accidental
When you send a regional TG it gets marked with this symbol and if you hover over it with your mouse it says “Region Telegram”
The one Curly sent is marked with this image and it says “WA Campaign telegram”
@Kringle may want to consider the complaint in light of that
Kringle Today at 11:55 AM
I believe these might be relevant: [2210.HC] Kris Kringle v. Curlyhoward - #2 by flowerpetal and Discord
Belschaft Today at 11:59 AM
[thumbs up emoji]
Griffindor Today at 4:11 PM
@Belschaft Please make comments on the new case thread
Kringle, sorry if im doing this wrong 
Kringle Today at 4:19 PM
I think the only part that is worth reminding, just in case you haven’t done it already, is to contact Curlyhoward to let them know that charges have been filed against them.
This is the text I used for a related case, if it helps:
[sample TG provided]
Griffindor Today at 4:21 PM
I did a TG already, not all pretty like yours, but a TG nonetheless 
Kringle Today at 4:21 PM
Awesome.
Oh, if possible try to use tags.
Griffindor Today at 4:23 PM
Also, he just pleaded guilty to me in TG. Do I need him/his attorney to post that to the forums? Or can I just say he did and post the admittance? (edited)
Kringle Today at 4:25 PM
That is probably something you and @Belschaft would have to decide.
Griffindor Today at 4:25 PM
very well pokes @Belschaft
Below are screenshots of the Telegram conversation between myself and Curlyhoward on November 3rd, 2022 from approximately 3:30 PM CST to 4:30 PM CST.
Below is my Telegram to Curlyhoward informing him of the charge levied against him.
Below is a Telegram response from Curlyhoward admitting guilt and entering a guilty plea with the Court.
Below is my Telegram response to Curlyhoward confirming his guilty plea.
Below is a Telegram response from Curlyhoward confirming his understanding of their guilty plea.
Below is my Telegram response to Curlyhoward letting him know that the Court will be in contact soon.
All righty @Belschaft
Since Curlyhoward has already admitted guilt, my recommendation would be to issue an indictment for corruption and bring this case to a close.
We have evidence (as well as admission) that he unlawfully used his regional officer permissions to pin a dispatch to the WFE as well as send out a mass regional-TG using RO powers. This was all done for the purpose of their reelection to the Local Council.
Do you concur with moving forward with the case along these lines?
On an administrative case note, Chief Justice Kringle is recused from this case as they are the petitioner.
Agreed. You should probably also let Curly that he will need to make his guilty plea in the forum once you have done that and then we can move on to sentencing.
Curlyhoward’s guilty plea and defense have been received and accepted by the Court.
I would also like to move forward and grant Kris’ motion for an expedited case. Do you concur?
We don’t need to be firm on what sentence we should deliver at this stage, but I think a basic view of how harsh to make the sentence should be briefly discussed. I am inclined to be lenient since he seems to have truly not known about the RO powers. This isn’t an excuse, but I still think an acceptable punishment will be the forgoing of his (next term in LC) should he win, or a barring of his running (next term) should he lose. I am also open to allowing him to hold office, albeit without the RO power to use TG and other comms-related powers. What do you think the sentence should be?
With regard to the verdict, I will begin drafting.
Do you think it would be a good idea to ask the following questions:
Why did you disregard the prompts the game provided you when you sent the regional TG and pinned the dispatch of the WFE?
What made you think that after several years of being in the region that anyone could pin dispatches to the WFE or send mass-TG’s without spending money?
Have you read any of the laws of the region? Particularly the laws that past LC’s have violated to ensure you didn’t meet the same fate?
With an election to run I can see why Kris wants an expedited process and agree we should grant it. A he has pled guilty we can accept that and move to the sentencing case/stage. The judicial procedures say that the Notice of Sentencing Hearing needs to have a preliminary sentence and then the convicted party & general public has seven days (less if expedited) to challenge it and then we have three days at the end of that to confirm it.
I think asking those questions is defintely a good idea - I don’t buy his “I thought anyone could do it” claim, but I find it very plausible that he didn’t actually realize it was illegal for him to do it. The best way to do it is probably as part of the post accepting his guilty verdict and moving from hearing to sentencing.
On a practical level the laws around use of RO powers exist to prevent incumbents from gaining an unfair advantage in an election, so any sentence should look to adress that and remove any possible advantage Curly has aquired. I think our proposed sentence should be removal from this election as I can’t see anything else which matches what he did - illegally use RO powers granted to Local Councillors to try and win the election to stay a Local Councillor - but I’d be open to changing that if someone makes a good argument otherwise in the challenge period. I think thats the harshest we would want to be and it’s worth making that clear and explaining if anyone has a proposal which is sufficiently punitive and restorative that we are willing to change the sentence.
Hope that all makes sense.
HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2210.HC] KRIS KRINGLE V. CURLYHOWARD
SUBMISSION 03 NOVEMBER 2022 | PROBABLE CAUSE 05 NOVEMBER 2022 | VERDICT 10 NOVEMBER 2022
Charges:
Curlyhoward - Corruption
Summary of the Verdict:
It is the finding of the Court that Curlyhoward’s use of their regional officer permissions to 1) pin a dispatch to the World Factbook Entry and 2) subsequently sending a regional telegram to all residents of the South Pacific fulfills the definition of corruption as defined by Article 1, Section 7 of the Criminal Code. Curlyhoward’s actions intended to influence the citizens of the South Pacific to vote for their reelection to the Local Council. By using their ability to communicate with the region at large via the appearance and communication powers given to an incumbent Local Councilor, they had undue influence and access to the citizens of the region that their fellow candidates did not possess. Therefore, for the aforementioned reason above, the Court finds Curlyhoward guilty of Corruption.
Justice Griffindor delivered the verdict, signed also by Justice Belschaft.
Background:
On 01 November 2022, the South Pacific began the process of electing the next Local Council for the upcoming term. Several candidates emerged, of which Curlyhoward was one of them. Within a few hours of the election process beginning, Curlyhoward pinned their reelection dispatch to the World Factbook Entry (WFE), using their Regional Officer authority granted to them by virtue of their Local Councilor position, which was promptly taken down by the Election Commissioner, Kris Kringle [1]. The Election Commissioner, believing that this event was isolated, did not pursue the violation of the law further. However, two days later, Curlyhoward once again violated regional law by sending a mass, region-wide telegram to the citizens of the South Pacific asking them to vote for their reelection [2], again using the powers of their Regional Officer position in an unlawful manner. It was at this point that the Election Commissioner brought this second violation of the law, in addition to the first violation, to the attention of the High Court for consideration. Shortly thereafter, the Cabinet, operating under the authority granted to it by Article 4, Section 3 of the Regional Communications Act [3], then revoked Curlyhowards regional officer status, citing their use of their powers to engage in political debate (campaigning) [4].
Corruption:
Various members of the region, from the Election Commissioner to a member of the Cabinet, from a legislator to the defendant themself, all provided evidence of corruption having taken place or corroborated the evidence. The Election Commissioner provided evidence of the initial unlawful acts taking place [5] (the pinning of a dispatch to the WFE and the content of the region-wide telegram), and Purple Hyacinth, the incumbent Prime Minister, corroborated and confirmed what the Election Commissioner believed to be the facts regarding the use of regional officer powers. Article 1, Section 7 of the Criminal Code defines corruption as “the misuse of public office for private or personal advantage” [6]. Looking first at the dispatch that Curlyhoward pinned to the WFE, it is clear that by using their regional officer permissions to place their campaign in a prominent spot within the visibility of anyone viewing the main page of the region Curlyhoward, intentionally or not, likely would have been able to gain support for their reelection bid as no other candidate possessed the ability to pin their campaign to the WFE for equal viewing. Similarly, by sending a region-wide telegram to all the members of the region using the powers of their office, Curlyhoward was able to bring his campaign to the attention of all the potential voters in the region. Intentional or not, the use of their regional officer powers constituted an undue influence on the electorate that would present a clear personal advantage in achieving reelection to the Local Council, thus fulfilling the definition of corruption under the Criminal Code.
Mitigating Factors:
The argument has also been made that Curlyhoward could have used stamps, and thus paid actual (real-life) currency for the ability to send mass telegrams outside of their regional officer powers, to send out the mass telegram. It is important to note that the Court decided in [2001.HQ]: Application of the Regional Communication Act that the use of stamps to engage in mass communication with members of the region falls outside the scope of the Regional Communication Act’s aim of providing a standard by which regional officers should abide with regard to the use of their privileged status [7], which, as noted by [1817.HC]: New Haudenosaunee Confederacy V. Concrete Slab is “a privilege and an opportunity that few ever receive” in their time in NationStates [8]. Unfortunately for an incumbent regional officer, the ability to use stamps in favor of their regional officer position is not possible, but perhaps sending a mass telegram through a second non-regional officer nation or using an alternative legal way to spread their message could have yielded better effects with less of a legal issue.
In their defense, Curlyhoward contended that they were not aware that only Local Councilors possessed the ability to pin dispatches, run polls, or send mass telegrams. While this may or may not be truthful, the Court has no way of knowing whether or not this is how they truly thought at the time. However, the Court must admit that it seems incredibly unlikely that the defendant could not have known that only regional officers possessed the powers they are accused of abusing. Curlyhoward is among this region’s longest extant nations and would thus undoubtedly have been able to notice over the years that only members of the government (regional officers) possess the ability to communicate at large with the region, alter the region’s WFE, or create and administer polls. Similarly, when the Court asked Curlyhoward if they had read the Criminal Code, among other laws (such as the Regional Communication Act or the Charter), they revealed that they had not. The Court is understanding that being unaware of the existence of a law can happen, but ignorance of the law, particularly ignorance of law relevant to an incumbent officeholder, is not justifiable in any circumstance. The region rightly holds officeholders to a higher standard of expectation and performance, and this expectation is rooted in their ability to discharge the laws of the region and fulfill the mandate that their position entails.
Summary:
In summary, the Court finds that by pinning a dispatch to the WFE and sending a mass regional telegram to the residents of the South Pacific using regional officer powers, Curlyhoward gained a personal advantage in their reelection bid for the Local Council, which fulfills the definition of corruption under the laws of the South Pacific. Therefore, the Court finds Curlyhoward guilty of corruption under Article 1, Section 7 of the Criminal Code.
It is so ordered.
Footnotes:
[1] Evidence 1 Submitted by the Petitioner. Retrieved from: [2210.HC] Kris Kringle v. Curlyhoward
[2] Evidence 2 Submitted by the Petitioner. Retrieved from: [2210.HC] Kris Kringle v. Curlyhoward
[3] Regional Officer Act; Article 4, Section 3 (2022) The MATT-DUCK Law Archive
[4] Executive Order of the Cabinet Revoking Curlyhowards Regional Officer Powers. Retrieved from: Cabinet Orders - #23 by flowerpetal
[5] The Election Commissioners’ initial evidence. Retrieved from: [2210.HC] Kris Kringle v. Curlyhoward
[6] Criminal Code; Article 1, Section 7 (2022). The MATT-DUCK Law Archive
[7] [2001.HQ]: Application of the Regional Communication Act. Retrieved from ORCS.
[8] [1817.HC]: New Haudenosaunee Confederacy V. Concrete Slab. Retrieved from ORCS.
HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2210.HC] KRIS KRINGLE V. CURLYHOWARD
SUBMISSION 03 NOVEMBER 2022 | PROBABLE CAUSE 05 NOVEMBER 2022 | VERDICT 10 NOVEMBER 2022
Proposed Sentance for Curlyhoward
Whereas this Court has found Curlyhoward guilty of Corruption, the Court must now deliver a sentence for the aforementioned crime. The proposed sentence should be as follows:
The Court believes that by using their office for personal gain, Curlyhoward should not be entitled to occupy said office again for at least the term that their unlawful actions were meant to elect them to.
Should Curlyhoward or any other party know of any reason why this sentence should not be given as initially found, they are invited to present their reasons before this Court no later than 17 November 2022 at 12:00 UTC.
It is so ordered.
Agreed.
Very well, the Verdict will be posted momentarily.
@Belschaft Barring any further comments by interested parties, this is my final sentence. I addressed Curlyhoward’s request while also doing the due diligence of reminding the region that we take justice seriously (I felt particularly compelled to add it in because this is my first Criminal Case that I am presiding over). What do you think about it?
HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2210.HC] KRIS KRINGLE V. CURLYHOWARD
SUBMISSION 03 NOVEMBER 2022 | PROBABLE CAUSE 05 NOVEMBER 2022 | VERDICT 10 NOVEMBER 2022 | SENTENCEING 18 NOVEMBER 2022
Sentance for Curlyhoward Imposed
Whereas this Court has found Curlyhoward guilty of Corruption and released a proposed sentence for consideration by interested parties, the Court received one comment related to the sentence. The only comment, made by the defendant, Curlyhoward, requested that their sentence be “time served,” with their justification being that their regional officer power had already been removed. The Court has considered the request and will now issue its opinion to it.
The judicial powers of the South Pacific, though seldom used (as it relates to Criminal Cases), is a powerful tool to ensure the community follows the agreed upon rules in order to ensure good faith discourse within the region. The Court seriously considers all such actions brought before it, and, in particular, the Court takes the sentencing process in Criminal Cases very seriously. The sentencing process is the final step before a defendant potentially loses their ability to freely take part in the community for a set duration of time. It is imperative that justice be done to those affected by unlawful behavior, and the defendant receive a sentence not overly burdensome in relation to the crime they committed.
Curlyhoward, in committing the crime they are convicted of, was able to secure a personal advantage over other members of the region by using their regional officer powers in a way that they were not intended to be lawfully used. It makes logical sense for the proposed sentence to be the removal from consideration for the post they would have attained with or without the use of unlawful use of regional officer powers; hence the Court disallowing the defendants ability to hold office that allows access to a regional officer spot.
Curlyhoward contends that the mere removal of their regional officer powers for the term they were currently in is enough of a punishment. The Court disagrees for two reasons:
First, it was the Cabinet, not the Court, that ordered the removal of their regional officer status. Had the Court ordered such an action be undertaken, perhaps this argument could possess more weight, but the Court must issue justice independent of an order by the Cabinet, which can be repealed at will.
Second, as has been thoroughly explained in the verdict and sentencing process, a “time served” sentence does not adequately cover the damage done by the defendant during the election process. Curlyhoward’s actions manipulated the Local Council election towards their favor, and the upcoming term for which they would benefit has yet to begin. A “time served” sentence would amount to a slap on the wrist in this case.
It is for these two reasons that the Court must reject the request made by Curlyhoward. Now, the Court must now deliver the final sentence for the charge of Corruption.
The official sentence is as follows:
The Court has notified the relevant officers so that the sentence might be imposed.
Let this serve as a reminder to all members of the region that no one person is above the law, and ignorance of the law is not an excuse for violating it.
It is so ordered.
Fine by me.
Will post in a couple days
The sentence has been posted and thus the case is concluded.
@KrisKringle at your leisure you may now do whatever administrative maintenance to the case needs to be done.
