Some Legal questions

[Moonbat]

Ok. This is for my WIP.

So some background.
Harold is an Intelagent, he is a very powerful computer mind type thing. He has spent the last millennia hiding/living beneath the Planck length. He has recently re-entered real space. When he re-entered he had to convert his energy to mass and so initially there was an 'event' that if you were too near you risked being destroyed. Three ships were close (one particularly so) but Harold moved them all to safety before they got in any trouble. He briefly spoke to one ship and then set off on his way.
Whilst travelling through m-space he kept stubbing the toe that he kept in 'real-space' and slowed down to travel through real-space for a short while. At this point he found he was being followed and hounded by Papparazzi. He set off again (in m-space) but had to stop because someone (rudely) flagged him down/attacked him with a commmunication laser. He stopped again and several ships crashed into the back of him, he protected them from damage and and moved them to safety.
The communication was a supeona, well several supeonii. He then travels to a nearby system. When he gets there is being being charged with several things. These include:

1. Traffic Offences
   1. Travelling too fast
      1. breaking the laws of physics
      2. travelling in an poorly/uncharted dimension
   2. stopping too fast
      1. stopping without warning
      2. stopping without due care and or attention
2. undisclosed military capabilities
   1. aiding the enemy
   2. treason against the MGC
   3. war crimes (ancient)
3. Inappropriate behaviour
   1. touching/manipulating with your fields another ship without their consent
   2. moving another ship without consent
   3. temporary ship-napping
   4. holding a ship against its will
4. breaking health and safety laws
   1. Injuries caused by appearance (unannounced)
   2. Brain muddling caused by undisclosed abilities
5. privacy laws
   1. celebrity without notice
   2. not posing for photographs
   3. rudeness in the face of legitimate invasion of privacy

My plan is to have the court proceedings descend into farce. Harold can't hang around so will create 5 different avatars to send to the planet and defend him in court. Each avatar has been specifically designed to defend/fight the case it is assigned to. Eventually I would like two of his avatars to be left in court arguing against each other. 1 of these will almost certainly be the one fighting treason and war crimes. Not sure which one the other will be, but this is where the actual questions come in (phew, sorry for all that)

Is it possible/feasible when defending one's self to switch into a prosecution mode against those prosecuting you, kind of like counter suing but actively charging/accusing them of something in an effort to make them drop the case for fear of being found guilty?

It would be expected that some of the charges would be tried at a higher court than others, traffic offences and treason don't really got to the same court, am I right in thinking that proceedings from small local courts can be raised/challenged in higher courts, all the way up?

On this note, how many court levels would there likely be for a large galactic society spanning thousands of worlds?

Is there any way that the 5 cases can cross over, so that defending one of them can be used as evidence in prosecuting another? Or is that not allowed?

Would they be 5 different cases, considering that the MGC would happily try the H&S ones just to annoy/slow down Harold until they can get hold of him/try him for treason or would they all be rolled into one with lots of charges?

With something like war crimes, can/are the winners of the war ever (be) tried? (the MGC sort of lost but like to claim a draw)

Can someone (or something) be tried for a war crime that happened in a war during which the prosecuting body(ies) didn't exist? Sort of a restrospective law, as the law didn't exist at the time of the war?

Also, I think laws can be changed at will by governments so could (as part of the farce) the MGC keep changing laws to try and make sure Harold is guilty of something? How would this process look or come out in court?

I know that recently the US changed the rules that define a combatant, can laws changed like this act restrospcetively (I would hope not)

Ok, that is all for now. This is really more of an opening set of questions, I want to be able to ridicule the inflexibility of law and cynically parody the blame culture. I may have more, but any answers/thoughts you guys/gals can provide would be greatly appreciated

 

[steve12553]

I no longer wonder how you came by the name Moonbat.

But all seriousness aside, I really think you can write your ticket here. You just need to be consistent or at least consistently inconsistent. The laws only have to make sense in the culture you've created.

 

[Bowler1]

That's a long question.

If the PM in Italy can get re-elected, never mind stay out of jail on all sort of silly legalities, then none of the above should be a problem. As Steve says, you can write you own ticket - but non-payment can lead to extended fines or a custodial sentence!

Oh dear, it's catching.

 

[The Judge]

Since you’re going for absurdity, then you really can do anything you want with the court procedures – there’s no point worrying about small issues, when the whole set of charges confronting him is ludicrous.

1. Traffic Offences as you’ll appreciate – these really are all daft offences
   1. Travelling too fast
      1. breaking the laws of physics
      2. travelling in an poorly/uncharted dimension
   2. stopping too fast
      1. stopping without warning
      2. stopping without due care and or attention
2. undisclosed military capabilities – I don’t see how the 3 sub crimes come out of the main heading so you might want to re-think this
   
   1. aiding the enemy "the enemy" is generally only use actually during the armed conflict
   2. treason against the MGC
   3. war crimes (ancient) this would have to be the starting of the war, or offences which violate accepted norms of warfare
3. Inappropriate behaviour – surely these would be similar to traffic offences since they involve other ships rather than "inappropriate behaviour" which to me is a heading for people-people contact
   
   1. touching/manipulating with your fields another ship without their consent
   2. moving another ship without consent
   3. temporary ship-napping Is the ship sentient? If so, then an anology with kidnapping is OK, but if not, then it would be more the equivalent of a taking and driving away offence
   4. holding a ship against its will Again if sentient, this is likely to be false imprisonment. If not, the "will" isn't right - I'd suggest a theft kind of offence.
      
4. breaking health and safety laws - to me, if there are specific injuries caused (or alleged) these would be listed as separate offences rather than simply lumped together as H&S
   1. Injuries caused by appearance (unannounced)
   2. Brain muddling caused by undisclosed abilities
5. privacy laws
   1. celebrity without notice
   2. not posing for photographs
   3. rudeness in the face of legitimate invasion of privacy

In real legal actions the summons/indictment would have to give details of the statute under which he is charged and exactly what he is alleged to have done in committing the offence is – ie “That on or around 198th Julaug 2169 in or around Sector blu-green PLxE you did wilfully move a ship, namely Lord Baden-Powell registration BoyScoutCX, from area 51^ to area 57^ contrary to section 25(c) Offences Against Sentient Ships Act 2145”

NB I'd also expect some civil actions to be started by ship-owners/injured people/foiled paparazzi.

My plan is to have the court proceedings descend into farce. Harold can't hang around so will create 5 different avatars to send to the planet and defend him in court. Why doesn't the MGC argue that use of avatars isn't allowed? That would really cause problems for him.

Each avatar has been specifically designed to defend/fight the case it is assigned to. I'd advise him not to - he wants the avatars to be able to answer the charges in each court, just in case anything happens to one of them. Eventually I would like two of his avatars to be left in court arguing against each other. Unlikely since they are both defending 1 of these will almost certainly be the one fighting treason and war crimes. Not sure which one the other will be, but this is where the actual questions come in (phew, sorry for all that)

Is it possible/feasible when defending one's self to switch into a prosecution mode against those prosecuting you, kind of like counter suing but actively charging/accusing them of something in an effort to make them drop the case for fear of being found guilty?Not in any legal regime I know of. But since this is patently silly, there’s no reason you can’t invent something of the kind. There are procedures under E&W (English and Welsh) law for individuals to bring private prosecutions ie without the state, so there’s no reason that can’t be extended. He, however, would need to allege what crimes were supposedly committed and by whom etc. eg he might allege that a prosecution witness had lied on oath, or that a prosecution lawyer was taking a bribe from a paparazzo to prosecute. In E&W law, any such prosecutions would be heard separately, ie not bound up in the initial action, but again as it’s silly, you could have it heard in the same court if you wanted. Quite whether any such charges would worry the MGC enough to drop charges is another matter.

It would be expected that some of the charges would be tried at a higher court than others, traffic offences and treason don't really got to the same court, am I right in thinking that proceedings from small local courts can be raised/challenged in higher courts, all the way up? Not quite. In E&W law, there are magistates courts where certain offences must be heard, usually the less important, and there are some which can be heard either in the mags or crown courts, then others only in the crown court. The mags also hear the initial part of bigger cases which are then committed to the crown court. The crown court can hear appeals from the mags (ie if someone appeals against conviction/sentence) and can sentence if the mags think their powers of sentencing aren't enough. There are then appellate courts above the Crown court, but they only come into play on appeals eg against conviction. Again, though, you can structure your courts as you wish.

On this note, how many court levels would there likely be for a large galactic society spanning thousands of worlds? As many or as few as you want. I see no reason why more than two or three appellate courts are needed, though.

Is there any way that the 5 cases can cross over, so that defending one of them can be used as evidence in prosecuting another? Or is that not allowed? You can make whatever rules of evidence you want. But an admission in one court can usually be accepted as evidence in another, yes.

Would they be 5 different cases, considering that the MGC would happily try the H&S ones just to annoy/slow down Harold until they can get hold of him/try him for treason or would they all be rolled into one with lots of charges? Likely 5 cases, possibly more if they split the personal injury cases and eg the ancient war crimes off from the others. Also, if the traffic offences occurred in separate areas, different worlds may take jurisdiction making different cases eg if someone was speeding across France and Germany, he'd get summonses from the different courts, although the speeding was all part of the same long drive.

With something like war crimes, can/are the winners of the war ever (be) tried? (the MGC sort of lost but like to claim a draw) Yes, if the political will is there. War crimes are based on actions which go beyond simply fighting the war into gross violations of "proper" wartime conduct eg mass murders/rapes.

Can someone (or something) be tried for a war crime that happened in a war during which the prosecuting body(ies) didn't exist? Sort of a restrospective law, as the law didn't exist at the time of the war? Of course. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

Also, I think laws can be changed at will by governments so could (as part of the farce) the MGC keep changing laws to try and make sure Harold is guilty of something? How would this process look or come out in court? In E&W law, yes, laws can be changed/brought in at any time but generally retrospective legislation isn't allowed, ie if a new law is brought in, it can't be back-dated to catch people. However, I'm pretty sure that this has actually happened with things like H&S legislation coming out of Brussels. Again, though, since this is a farce, you can make your legislators do patently unjust things like this.

I know that recently the US changed the rules that define a combatant, can laws changed like this act restrospcetively (I would hope not) As above. It is slightly different re-defining and/or clarifying who comes within the scope of a law, though, as opposed to introducing a whole new law.

Hope some of that helps.

 

[Moonbat]

Thank you very much Judge, that is all extremely helpful.

The ships are sentient, so false imprisonment will be relevant. And I think not all the cases are brought by the MGC some, as you pointed out, will be civil actions brought on by the ships/paps. I'm loving the summons/indictment that will come in very handy (and plenty of scope for silliness)

 

[The Judge]

Civil actions are very different from criminal actions, with different procedures and rules of evidence etc, and the two would be heard in different courts in E&W, though again you can make your courts hybrids if you want -- it will certainly make it sillier.