RTL v. Ripken

[Culture of Life]

JUSTICE COURT OF RIGHT TO LIFE
RTL v. Ripken
Decided June 9, 2014

---

RIGHT TO LIFE,
Plaintiff, represented by Aquino,

v.

THE UNITED STATES OF RIPKEN,
Defendant, representing himself.

---

The government charged Ripken, a regional citizen, with using a multi (Finkip) to apply for citizenship a second time for the purpose of gaining an unfair political advantage over his fellow region members.

---

DEVOTED DECONS, JP, delivered the judgment of the Justice Court.

I've been tasked with determining whether or not Ripken is indeed a unique individual from Finkip. There happen to be many similarities between the nations, and indeed, a shared IP address. I find myself having difficulty in accepting the fact that these are, indeed, two unique individuals. Within the game, several people have made the same claim when joining the WA and subsequently finding themselves banned. The natural response, by the moderators of NS, therefore, is to take the approach that the legitimacy of such a claim is not verifiable, and the banishment stands.

In addition, the story changed from one post to another; Ripken said he moved in the beginning of the trial, and now it is Finkip who has moved.

When determining whether an act is indeed criminal, I believe there must be mens rea and actus reus. I wish to set a precedent that actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, or "the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty." One method I believe the court should use to determine mens rea is whether or not the criminal act stands to benefit the accused.

In this case, the citizenship was applied for by both Ripken and Finkip, for the purposes of creating a political party within Right to Life. This benefits Ripken, as the requirement for forming a political party would thusly be met. To me, this shows some planning and thought about the act.

To complicate the matters, Ripken has been elected to the Regional Senate. I wish to set a precedent here, as well. It is the opinion of the court that any nation standing trial should be disallowed to run for a position while the trial goes on. I realize I have deliberated for over a week, however, the trial was still ongoing as of the nominations period. Ripken should not have been an eligible candidate at that time.

The court finds Ripken guilty of the crime of multiplicity with the intent to benefit from multiple citizenships. On his first offense, the court declares his Citizenship forfeit for a period of 2 months, including time served (the one month duration of this trial.) Subsequent infractions of this law shall be met with harsher punishment, including permanent banishment. Ripken is allowed to reapply for citizenship no earlier than 10 July 2014.

In summary: Ripken will lose citizenship, and the senate seat shall be forfeit.

It is so ordered.

Order executed by the Founder on June 9, 2014.