Guild Meeting and Criminal Trial: 12/8/13

It seems inconsistent to me that you read me the riot act in West Brit about this trial and how you were going to tear me apart on the witness stand and then you didn't even show up. And since when is Blaise "LEADERS". I believe there are 3 leaders in this guild: Blaise, Les and myself and I know for a fact that Les and I never gloated about anything at all. As a matter of fact, I haven't spoken to anyone about it outside of leadership. I am surprised Bartimus went through it as well, considering that his counsel flaked on him.

I'm surprised it was even requested. It had nothing at all to do with him as a person and everything to do with his known and admitted actions in disregard of the laws of the land he agreed upon when becoming a member of the guild.

If we make an exception for him, then we must for all and then what we will become is precisely what we started out to avoid in the first place.

I withdrew from the case weeks ahead of time and publicly so, after repeated statements by guild leaders that fairness and a serious inquiry into the truth of charges were not to be sought. Most especially by Blaise, who I surmised is the ultimate leader though other, lesser leadership said similar things. It just didn't interest me any longer. More power to you if that is what you are after with the guild.

For not being interested you sure talk a lot

Just responding to questions and comments!

I'd love for you to come up with some kind of quote from me saying that I don't care about bart or fairness or the outcome of the trial so I can call you a liar.

I took that to be your endorsement of Blaise's position that there were to be ever-changing rules so as to produce a predetermined outcome. Maybe it wasn't, but it certainly wasn't an objection to it.

Please don't call me names. It is not nice.

There was one rule relevant to the entire topic: If you want to grief and PK with impunity, do so on unknown alts. As a brazen and public PK, bartimus has been in violation of the rule for a long time. The only thing lacking was action on my part to remove him in full accordance with the tenets of the guild.

If you didn't get the big hullabaloo trial you sought, I'm sorry to disappoint. No rules have changed here, only your perception of what was going on without understanding the case or the law of the land.

But you said and implied on multiple occasions that the trial was a railroading and that no serious attempt would be made to discover whether or not the charges were true. The verdict was predetermined. I had a pretty good case worked up too.

A case of underwhelming bullshit? I imagine so. There is no evidence you could possibly come up with in defense of someone who has not only openly violated the laws of the land, but has full video evidence of it on Youtube. There was nothing to debate or determine other than whether or not he should be allowed BACK into the guild.

I provided the smallest possible pinhole of re-entry at this point and he's got a long road ahead if he expects to make it through.

If your goal is to PK peoples' IQs you're doing a fabulous job btw.

If the case was so overwhelming, you should have allowed the defense to mount a fair defense. You would have nothing to lose! Alas, the very strong case I had built will never be heard or vetted by an impartial group.

I said 'underwhelming' and considering your attention to detail seemingly missed that critical difference in terms, your defense was likely of just as poor quality.

I was referring to the prosecution's case: If you thought it was so overwhelming, and that a viable defense could not be mounted, you should have held a fair hearing.

Nothing was overwhelming about our case. It was cut and dry and there was no amount of debate or evidence that could possibly expunge him of his wrongdoings. The 'hearing' or 'trial' was provided at his request to provide an option for him to argue his reasoning for expecting to remain a member of the guild.


Considering this is a monarchy and the king's word is final, the fact that there was a case at all was just a nicety in consideration of our friendship and his tenure in the guild. Sorry to disappoint you but this isn't LA Law, it's the Land of OoO where being random, batshit crazy and/or empurpled is par for course.


Good luck in your future boring and inane ramblings on fairness.

....

We agree then! Except a strong case, probably successful, could be made on his behalf had he been given a chance. Alas! But we agree on everything else!

There is no chance in hell any case could be successful vs this evidence:
http://www.uorenaissance.com/?page=m_pl ... s&fn=32388

Find another tree to bark up. This one has been felled, turned into furniture, dyed obnoxious hues and locked down in our Trammel fortresses.

I disagree, but you were unwilling to hear the case.

Unwilling to care about your opinion. You simply cannot prove in any way on this planet or any other, that the clearly indicated character has NOT committed the murders so clearly listed on his character profile. I don't know if you're getting off on wasting your own time or mine responding, but suit yourself. There is no case, you would not have proven anything other than your ability to waste time, which is also abundantly clear.


Thanks for playing.