Scribe's Desk

Post by **shetef** » Thu Dec 12, 2013 8:12 pm

If you have any questions, complaints, concerns, gripes or expressions of admiration for me, post them here. I'll respond appropriately as soon as I can.

Datford-Zyvetskistaahn · Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:02 pm

To ask the Scribe:

What is the view of the department on the validity of evidence acquired through entrapment;

What discretion the department exercises in the charges it submits;

Whether, in the view of the department, voting against the interests of the Order and the Sekhmet on liberation resolutions in the World Assembly, campaigning against the interests of the Order on such resolutions, voting on this forum or others in a manner that is against the interests of the Order on such resolutions, submitting a liberation resolution that is against the interests of the Order or aiding in the submission of such a resolution are criminal acts;

Whether, in the view of the department, "a time of war" extends to a time when military actions by the Sekhmet are ongoing but not supported by a declaration of war;

Whether the department will take further efforts to pursue charges against Councillor Romefeller, with regard to the St Abbaddon affair.

Post by **shetef** » Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:25 pm

Datford-Zyvetskistaahn wrote:Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:02 amTo ask the Scribe:

What is the view of the department on the validity of evidence acquired through entrapment;

What discretion the department exercises in the charges it submits;

Whether, in the view of the department, voting against the interests of the Order and the Sekhmet on liberation resolutions in the World Assembly, campaigning against the interests of the Order on such resolutions, voting on this forum or others in a manner that is against the interests of the Order on such resolutions, submitting a liberation resolution that is against the interests of the Order or aiding in the submission of such a resolution are criminal acts;

Whether, in the view of the department, "a time of war" extends to a time when military actions by the Sekhmet are ongoing but not supported by a declaration of war;

Whether the department will take further efforts to pursue charges against Councillor Romefeller, with regard to the St Abbaddon affair.

1. It depends upon the circumstances. At the time the evidence was provided to me I did not view Scribe Dreizehn's line of questioning to be entrapment (at least not to a point which was unacceptable).

2. I'd need you to clarify exactly what this question means. If it answers your question, a through study of the Criminal Codex was part of my determination as to what charges were appropriate in relation to the evidence and the charges requested.

3. That would again depend upon circumstances. Usually I would say no as the Criminal Codex at this time does not explicitly state WA votes or campaigns as being within the jurisdiction of Osiran criminal law; in the case of Mr. Romefeller, his actions in the WA were not part of what determined the charges against him.

4. The Priesthood of Seshat does not view "a time of war" as extending to such circumstances when the Sekhmet is active outside of a declaration of war.

5. The charges against Mr. Romefeller were withdrawn earlier today. At this time, unless further evidence is presented to us, we do not plan on further prosecution with regard to these events.

Datford-Zyvetskistaahn · Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:16 pm

To ask the Scribe, or an appropriate deputy:

Whether, in his view, the actions of the department's prosecutor in the matter of the indictment of Pharaoh Ravenclaw and Keeper Dreizehn are appropriate;

What discretion the department exercises in the charges it submits, namely whether it ensures that all charges it submits can be supported by evidence and prosecuted effectively.

Post by **shetef** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:20 pm

Datford-Zyvetskistaahn wrote:Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:16 pmTo ask the Scribe, or an appropriate deputy:

Whether, in his view, the actions of the department's prosecutor in the matter of the indictment of Pharaoh Ravenclaw and Keeper Dreizehn are appropriate;

What discretion the department exercises in the charges it submits, namely whether it ensures that all charges it submits can be supported by evidence and prosecuted effectively.

Sorry to be late replying.

1. The Temple of Seshat does not condone the recent actions of Priest Zaolat. I am currently reviewing the case and considering further action with a new prosecutor.

2. I personally ensure that there is evidence to support all charges and that charges can be effectively prosecuted. In the case of defamation it's a bit more open-ended as the line determining how much damage has to be done to constitute a crime is not made explicitly clear in the Criminal Codex. In the case of Councilor Romefeller, I am also reviewing the evidence and reevaluating whether this case can be realistically prosecuted.

War Wombat · Post by **War Wombat** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:16 pm

Dear Scribe,
Do grounds exist for a contempt of court charge for the prosecutor in the Romefeillor vs. Ravenclaw case stemming from his actions in the case

Post by **shetef** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 10:29 pm

War Wombat wrote:Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:16 amDear Scribe,
Do grounds exist for a contempt of court charge for the prosecutor in the Romefeillor vs. Ravenclaw case stemming from his actions in the case

That was considered but since none of the Elders raised a complaint or found him in contempt I decided not to pursue the matter. Should one of the Elders request it I will look into it again.