Eliot Clef Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 -snip- I've outlined why I disagree with your assessment of the situation here: >> http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2809&start=10#p28011 I can import it into this thread if desired, but I feel like we're already pushing what's reasonable discussion for this complaint thread. Link to comment
witchbells Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Phoebe Essel was in the brig for battery, threat of murder, and other minor charges I can't be bothered to remember. She was in there justly, she was read her charges, and I do not believe there was anything about this situation that should have prompted her release. Regardless of whether I benefited from Erza's actions ICly, I don't think less than a minute's worth of Erza not getting what he wanted was grounds to release the prisoner. In addition, reading about the actions that followed has me very shocked that a captain, who also happens to be a moderator, reacted to criticism in such a fashion. Link to comment
Jamini Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 -snip- I've outlined why I disagree with your assessment of the situation here: >> http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2809&start=10#p28011 I can import it into this thread if desired, but I feel like we're already pushing what's reasonable discussion for this complaint thread. Copied because skull gave us time to move things over: Ah, but it wasn't a pardon. You need to stop assuming it is. A pardon implies the regulation break never happened and no charges are applied. Phoebe was simply released two minutes early in the belief that she had not broken a regulation, due to the fact that the Warden, when questioned, did not know why she was brigged. Now: 1. He was releasing a prisoner early. That is indeed something that the HoS, and by extension the captain, is permitted to do. A prisoner he had reason to believe was unlawfully brigged at the time I will add. 2. Regardless of the legality of his actions, you clearly do not arrest the captain unless they are performing a clear violation of regulation. Which this was certainly not. Security had ample time to message CC and explain their case. Which they ultimately did, but not before making multiple attempts to detain. Security and the Captain were both clearly in the wrong. The former of mutiny, and the latter of slightly questionable exceeding official authority. Now, looking at regulations. mutiny is a grand crime, while the charges of exceeding official authority are not. Security is clearly. Very clearly. Much more in the wrong. Link to comment
Eliot Clef Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Oh, shit. Okay, I'll move this here instead of PMs. Ah, but it wasn't a pardon. You need to stop assuming it is. A pardon implies the regulation break never happened and no charges are applied. Phoebe was simply released two minutes early in the belief that she had not broken a regulation, due to the fact that the Warden, when questioned, did not know why she was brigged. This is in itself is a contradiction. What you are describing is, by definition, a pardon. Skull32 defined what Ezra ATTEMPTED to do, and what Captains ARE allowed to do, as a nullification of an unjust sentence. Ezra believed he was correct about this, and I believe he was acting in good faith, but he was wrong. Here is the relevant statement from the person who was imprisoned >> http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=2803&start=20#p28013 By definition, Ezra could not issue a legal nullification of a legitimate sentence to any degree. Not a reduction, not a "pardon", nothing. His actions here had no legitimacy. He believed the sentence to be illegitimate, but we know for a fact that he was wrong about this. 2. Regardless of the legality of his actions, you clearly do not arrest the captain unless they are performing a clear violation of regulation. Which this was certainly not. Security had ample time to message CC and explain their case. Which they ultimately did, but not before making multiple attempts to detain. Security and the Captain were both clearly in the wrong. The former of mutiny, and the latter of slightly questionable exceeding official authority. Now, looking at regulations. mutiny is a grand crime, while the charges of exceeding official authority are not. Security is clearly. Very clearly. Much more in the wrong. And here, I think, is where we disagree critically. I think what the Captain did was clearly, immediately, unambiguously against corporate regulations, albeit driven by ignorance rather than a deliberate intent to do so, and ultimately deteriorated into attempted murder by means of using lethal firearms to resist detainment. As such, I think Security acted within the boundaries of what Skull32 has laid out, and the Captain was much more heavily out of line. I'm not sure our viewpoints can really be reconciled, honestly. Link to comment
Jamini Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Noow, let's talk about something else, but related: nulling an arrest/sentence. If the arrest is made with no evidence backing it, or otherwise questionable/circumstancial evidence surrounding it, then the Captain should have the authority to call it into question. Along with a third party (an IAA or any other, preferably uninvolved head of staff will do), the evidence can be reviewed and the legality of the arrest brought into question. Such as say... nobody providing the charges for a prisoner. If the evidence produced is lacking, and can be objectively dismissed, then the Captain has the authority to null the arrest, charges, and any other forms of punishment applied. Which he attempted to do. Ultimately did. Then an attempt at arrest was made illegally against his person without CC approval. (CC approval was gained after the fact/during the arrest.) Link to comment
Eliot Clef Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Can't quote, on remote at the moment so its a bit impractical. But as I covered in my previous post and as Nursie has confirmed, the arrest and brig time was legitimate. The Captain released Phoebe with incomplete information and refused to listen to those who arrived to present said information afterwards. I agree that there was a brief window where his actions were acceptable and reasonable in the context of the information available to him, but that rapidly went out the window. Link to comment
Jamini Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I agree that there was a brief window where his actions were acceptable and reasonable in the context of the information available to him, but that rapidly went out the window. At which point, as he continued to refuse to come back to the brig, a complaint to CC should have been filed. Instead what happened is security attempted to detain the captain before they got the okay from CC (which eventually did come in thanks to Galloway, but not before at least two witnessed attempts to arrest Ezra). Security acted in this instance as if they were the ultimate authority on the station, willingly defying orders and acting as mutineers. Link to comment
TishinaStalker Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 You all can stop the arguing back and forth now. I'm currently talking with players, and this will be left at that. Once I am done talking with people, I will post if this is resolved or not. Link to comment
TishinaStalker Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I'm an idiot and realized that I totally forgot to post here: Callum has been talked to concerning the entirety of this complaint. Staff will be keeping an eye on his future head of staff play. After action being taken, I will leave this complaint open for 24 hours before locking and archiving it. Link to comment
Recommended Posts