Point of Objection on SM

Go down

Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:21 am

Arthur_loxley wrote:First, something has changed with the sub-forum of the HoL Judges' Chambers.

Sorry, but only moderators can reply to posts in this forum.

Second, is the LHC taking a break, on vacation, busy, or something? Chief Juror has made a statement in the SM trial against Elmix and the other jurors have responded but await word from the LHC. Why does the LHC rush the trial when I have no access to English waters and heavily delay when I am around. I had planned on leaving again for international waters but obviously need to wait for this trial to finish.

Third, Artur_le_breton was removed as juror because of whatever excuse without an official resignation given. The LHC misled the participants in the trial by stating he offered to resigned, and as a result she replaced him. No notice was given to myself (as the petitioner) and it wasn't until my return that I found out about this. Communication is obviously lacking.

Fourth, other peers (and sometimes commoners) have been trying to intimidate and threaten others in these halls using OOC discussions to influence the decisions of the jurors. I feel that these people have tainted and influenced the trial. A policy should be made by this house to address peers (and commoners) waging war against a petitioner or trying to influence the jurors with petitions of dismissal or whatever.

Fifth, a strict timeline needs to be drafted and enforced as with the Court of Appeals. This charge was brought forth on December 24, 2009 and didn't even start until March 2010 for * insert your own reason here*.

Sixth, a discussion needs to be held regarding non-peers (or observers of this house) bringing forth charges of SM against a peer. It needs to be discussed and agreed upon to avoid issues in the future.

These are just a few things I have experienced, or heard, during the last six months and ask others to think critically about enacting/drafting or changing things to be more streamlined. If not, consider removing SM from the HoL charter and enforce the code of conduct of nobles via the Regent's hand by letting peers petition the Regent to mediate (similar to the power the Regent has to mediate inter county bickering, or whatever its called) bypassing the panel of peer jurors.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:21 am

Viceroy wrote:I will address the first one. I was requested to remove a list of people as the jurors were deliberating as I am the key holder. IF this person wishes to come forward, they may do so, but the King's secretary would have my head if I gave that information without their permission.

As far as the LHC, I do not know her schedule. Have you contacted her on this matter? Unfortunately, I have seen her in passing only, but I know I have been in passing a lot too.

On the third issue, is notice required for the petitioner on removal? Whether it is courteous or not is immaterial. I don't know the exact details regarding this matter. Have you requested information from the LHC on this one? If you were unhappy with the answer, did you speak with the Regent on this matter?

On the fourth matter, do you have any proof of this that could be shown? I think this is the part that would get sticky is getting permission for it. Not opposed to the idea at all, but curious of what work around we could do.

On the fifth matter, this is a great idea to discuss.... what sort of timeline and reprecussions for violating it?

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:21 am

Starbel wrote:The COA should have no jurisdiction over anything that happens in this house. Actions in this house are by and for nobles. This house must take care of its own business. Do we really want to set the precedent that this House can be governed from outside? Do we really want to admit that we can't take care of our own problems? Do we want the possibility that non nobles as judges on the COA can interfere with this house?

I say "no" to those questions. We must "clean our own house" if necessary.

Starbel
Viscount of Liverpool
COA justice

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:22 am

Arthur_loxley wrote:
Starbel wrote:The COA should have no jurisdiction over anything that happens in this house. Actions in this house are by and for nobles. This house must take care of its own business. Do we really want to set the precedent that this House can be governed from outside? Do we really want to admit that we can't take care of our own problems? Do we want the possibility that non nobles as judges on the COA can interfere with this house?

I say "no" to those questions. We must "clean our own house" if necessary.

Starbel
Viscount of Liverpool
COA justice

Sir, I think you misunderstand. I did not state the CoA would be in charge of the SM trials, but that we should have a time line as the CoA uses in their appeals cases. This way it would be easier and would streamline the process.

@ Viceroy,

I'm unsure why I was removed as I am the petitioner in the case and should have access to post freely in the trial. It's not like I am going to create new threads or spam the HoL Judge's chambers. Also, I believe you should give the name of the one who requested you remove people from the chambers. By withholding it, it seems like something is being kept secret. Giving a name will not get you in trouble. In fact, I'm not sure why you are still moderator of the HoL. I had thought that there was a request for change last month. I could be mistaken though.

I don't see why I would have to personally contact the LHC regarding the SM trial. Both myself and Artur_le_breton were mailed several times while we were away from English shores regarding the trial and now that seems not to be the case. The LHC primary duties is concerning this house and the HoL Judge's chamber is part of the operations of this house since SM trials are held there.

Removing or replacing jury members without informing the petitioner is both discourteous and may be seen as tampering. Before the jury was assembled both myself and Elmix were allowed to voice opinions for/against a juror. To find out that not one, but two jurors, were called forth without being informed is against tradition set forth by previous house leadership and could lead to accusations of bias or abuse of power.

Peers (a thread in this very house labeled OOC and removed to the Kingdom scrap heap) and non-peers (a thread in the commons regarding this matter) have been initiated to intimidate, insult, and threaten people into withdrawing from having this trial continue. It is there for all to see. None of this has been done in PM's as suggested unless you know something that I don't. Wink

Timeline - we need to review the procedure and access issues first. One main issue that I remember is the GUBR having access to the trial to set forth punishments to peers who continue to act in ignoble ways. Once this house knows who, (and their purpose) is supposed to have access, we can move on to procedural matters to come up with a generous timeline (similar to the CoA but not the CoA leading the trial).

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:22 am

Padriac.douglas wrote:I am very interested in why jurors were removed and under whose authority

this is all sounding very strange

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:22 am

Arkrantos wrote:I will not attempt to answer all questions partly due to personal bias and partly from not ahving great answers.


Sixth, a discussion needs to be held regarding non-peers (or observers of this house) bringing forth charges of SM against a peer. It needs to be discussed and agreed upon to avoid issues in the future.

The charge of Sm is the demeaning of one peer by another peer that is its limit and must remain as such. Those without Peerage should not be able to claim SM as they are not a peer.

Every County has protection mechanisms from harrasement & slaunder so should rely on thsoe or loby for them if they are non-existant.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:22 am

Artur_le_breton wrote:
Arkrantos wrote:I will not attempt to answer all questions partly due to personal bias and partly from not ahving great answers.


Sixth, a discussion needs to be held regarding non-peers (or observers of this house) bringing forth charges of SM against a peer. It needs to be discussed and agreed upon to avoid issues in the future.

The charge of Sm is the demeaning of one peer by another peer that is its limit and must remain as such. Those without Peerage should not be able to claim SM as they are not a peer.

Every County has protection mechanisms from harrasement & slaunder so should rely on thsoe or loby for them if they are non-existant.

I am in full agreement with the interpretation of the Charter of the House of Lords regarding Scandalum Magnatum in this matter. It has not been and should not ever be possible for a commoner (non-Peer) to raise the charge of Scandalum Magnatum against a Peer of England.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:23 am

Chrisiusmaximus wrote:Do you know what would be a good idea ?

If everyone who has invested any effort into this long winded stupid process finally all decided to quit !

For pities sake how long does it take to agree who said what and who is a big ninny ?

Pack this in all involved and focus 100% of your efforts on helping your country fight this war against NNGO Fury and scotland !

Arthur I thought you a bigger, better man than this, suck it up and prove your worth so that none can doubt Elmix was wrong !

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:49 am

Arthur_loxley wrote:
Chrisiusmaximus wrote:Do you know what would be a good idea ?

If everyone who has invested any effort into this long winded stupid process finally all decided to quit !

For pities sake how long does it take to agree who said what and who is a big ninny ?

Pack this in all involved and focus 100% of your efforts on helping your country fight this war against NNGO Fury and scotland !

Arthur I thought you a bigger, better man than this, suck it up and prove your worth so that none can doubt Elmix was wrong !

An example needs to be set. I do not appreciate being bullied, or requested, to withdraw for exercising my rights as a noble. This could have ended earlier, but continued actions (and failure to mediate on the part of Elmix while I was in sailing abroad) has renewed my focus on following through with the trial. I hold no high hopes regarding the outcome of the trial based on all the intimidation and apparent tampering that has occurred to try to get this trial to end on several levels.

If Elmix was wrong, the recommendations from the assembled jurors will reflect that and he will be punished accordingly. To tell me to 'suck it up' is similar to stating to other nobles that actions of harassment, slander and drafting of assassination plots is OK in the eyes of the crown. I apologize if you believe that to be true, but that is not my opinion.

A noble is supposed to act noble, for all to see. No matter where he is or who he is speaking to. To demean others is not the action anyone of peerage should make, what example does that set for anyone who aspires to be one? It is just these sorts of actions that lead so many to look at the ranks of nobility as flawed. A title something to sneer at rather than something to aspire to obtain because of their good deeds and services within the kingdom.

The world does not stop because NNGO has attacked England. This is the time that England needs to show that they can deal with all problems fairly and quickly, not to show that only one thing is important above all else. We cannot afford to focus solely on NNGO and leave the rest of England to flounder.

no·ble /ˈnoʊbəl/ adjective, -bler, -blest, noun
- of an exalted moral or mental character or excellence; lofty: a noble thought.
- admirable in dignity of conception, manner of expression, execution, or composition: a noble poem.
- very impressive or imposing in appearance; stately; magnificent: a noble monument.
- of an admirably high quality; notably superior; excellent.
- famous; illustrious; renowned.

I didn't want to turn this into a debate about the trial; this topic is to discuss points of objection that have come up during the course of the trial regarding procedures, etc.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:45 pm

Chrisiusmaximus wrote:Poppy cock Arthur, you are and have been making a meal of this for months as have those on the other side of the dispute !

We have a war on and you and your titles would be useful on the front line right now id say !

You can quote definitions at me till the cows come home wont change how I see things, Ive said all along this affair was ridiculous !

I understood Elmix's frustrations with you which culminated in his calling you nasty names because of your attempts to prevent armies from assisting the fallen Chester Council, something that I had to spend quite some time with you to get you to clarify remember ?

Their is far more to being noble than your view of it , bravery, honesty, loyalty and an ability to not fear getting ones hands dirty, I got my title for military service here and there, I didnt undergo a good manners and etiquette operation just to live up to your ideals !

I thought better of you than to try to continue such a petty spectacle when we are at war and when your opponent is busy fighting for your countries freedom ! I see Lord Elmix standing on the line a few hundred yards from my platoon each night, yet I look and look but do not see your banners anywhere Arthur !

Freedom of Speech is something our nation must cherish and everyone from the youngest to the highest are entitled to speak their minds, as far as I am concerned the Scandulum Magnatum nonesense is a stain on this nation and it should be scrapped permanently !

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:45 pm

Mistyblue wrote:I agree with everything my Brother Chrisiusmaximus said, there is a war on so get your noble titles on the front line with the rest of us.

Dont sit on your backsides dicktating to everone, show your worth your title.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  arthur_loxley on Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:00 pm

Arkrantos wrote:
A noble is supposed to act noble, for all to see. No matter where he is or who he is speaking to. To demean others is not the action anyone of peerage should make, what example does that set for anyone who aspires to be one? It is just these sorts of actions that lead so many to look at the ranks of nobility as flawed. A title something to sneer at rather than something to aspire to obtain because of their good deeds and services within the kingdom.

If this was true we would all be without title, I have seen most if not all act in such a manner at least once.
While I will not tell you to drop the issue I would ask you will the end result make you feel better? Will making an example heal any personal pain you feel? If not or if these symptoms do not exist then I am not sure there is a point to it all, again I am not trying to persuade you to drop it just do what you do for the right reasons, for your well being.

_________________
Humble Servant of Stafford County ¤ Faithful Aristotelian ¤


I can feel her halo..
arthur_loxley
arthur_loxley
Admin 2

Posts : 2296
Join date : 2009-03-03
Age : 588

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Point of Objection on SM

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum