March 6, 2010- Titulia v. Tom Norton  10GC00010
Rendered by: Chief Justice Colonel, Associate Justices Boyd X. Biggs and Scud69

Associate Justice Scud69 for the majority: 

Facts: 
The facts of this case are clearly outlined in the decision and resultant orders of case #9GC00005.

Reasoning:
The G.C. finds the arguments of the Justice Department quite persuasive and satisfactory. The Defendant has no qualified defense except the mitigation of sentence in reference to his apology and his previous work in this Republic and economic losses suffered.

It is perfectly clear that the Defendant was found guilty of a criminal offence for which this court and the Admin ordered a one week ban. Before fleeing he was found in contempt of court in addition to the criminal guilty finding. He remained away from the Republic for quite some time and only returned quite recently. He made no attempt to return soon after his departure.

The Justice Department has asked to extend the original court order by one week for a total of two weeks of being banned from this Republic. The defendant asks this to be mitigated based on the economic losses already suffered by him. This Court does not find this to be a mitigating factor. The accused willingly and with full intent of his own free thought, even though emotional at the time, pressed the emigrate button which then resulted in his economic losses. The Defendant, if he had not chosen to emigrate and instead had chosen to stay and be banned would have had access to those resources after the ban. There is also no real evidence to show that those resources are unrecoverable. There should be no leniency given by this Court for self imposed hardship , as the accused damaged himself through his own action. The defense of ‘emotional act’ also has no bearing, as the accused had weeks to compose himself and return, but he elected not to. Emotions cannot be a mitigating factor in this case.

The Court must find that the guilty party fled with intent to either avoid sanction or with purpose to obstruct or defeat justice. This is the only reasonable conclusion available to the Court.  The Defendant, however, has preformed services for this Republic in the past and for that service the Court will exercise some leniency and order a ban of 2 weeks less a day for a total of 13 days.

Conclusion:
The accused is to be banned for 13 days.
 


Comments


Comments are closed.