Changing Sentencing for Criminal Codex

shetef · Post by **shetef** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:26 pm

thirded

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:08 am

I will bring this to a vote tomorrow afternoon then.

Post by **Festavo** » Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:34 am

I support this and give it a fourth for the record

Theoden Sebastian · Post by **Theoden Sebastian** » Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:10 am

For the record of the Deshret, I would have supported this amendment by Todd if we have inserted a provisio that the change will be made to apply prospectively, meaning to successive cases. As no such qualification was made, there is now room to accord individuals previously sentenced under the old penalties leeway, something I am not quite keen on supporting. As such I sadly have to vote against it. A shame I was stricken by illness and thus have missed this. But anyway, here is my statement for the record of the Deshret. Thank you.

shetef · Post by **shetef** » Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:31 am

Josh Sebastian wrote:Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:10 amFor the record of the Deshret, I would have supported this amendment by Todd if we have inserted a provisio that the change will be made to apply prospectively, meaning to successive cases. As no such qualification was made, there is now room to accord individuals previously sentenced under the old penalties leeway, something I am not quite keen on supporting. As such I sadly have to vote against it. A shame I was stricken by illness and thus have missed this. But anyway, here is my statement for the record of the Deshret. Thank you.

Um. .what? How does this law in any way affect those previously sentenced?

Post by **Lord Ravenclaw** » Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:23 am

It means that he's recognised that Ridersyl can appeal his sentence as it'll fall within the 30 day period I allowed. Cormac has waived his right to appeal as far as I know.

War Wombat · Post by **War Wombat** » Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:24 pm

This works.