[PROCEEDINGS FINALISED] United States of Argonath vs. Ninth Avenue Razors

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

Court Minute

To ALL Parties,

The Court accepts the Prosecution's revised timeline and thanks it for its swift response. Furthermore, I have been told that the defence will require more time due to an urgent out of state case, the Court will extend the defence's timeframe to post their defence. The Court will grant further time extensions if necessary.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT

[1].        That Order No. 2 issued by the Court on the 15th of May 2017 be struck out and replaced with "That the Defence file a defence within 2 months."

DATED, on this 16th day of May, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

COURT MINUTE

I have given the defence ample time to respond to this case. This case has now been sitting in the courts, idle for now two months since the last orders were issued. As such the Court is satisfied that the defendant's have received ample opportunity to respond and replace counsel if necessary. Obviously they do not seem to be worried about such issues, as such the Court believes that under the Interim Constitution the defendants have received a fair trial but have not utilised the opportunity to respond to the indictment. The Court will proceed to hand down its judgement in one week's time unless the prosecution desires anything else.

DATED, on this 27th day of July, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[Klaus]

Seeing as Marco is extremely busy at this time, I will take over proceedings and represent myself and the accused. I hereby ask the judge for some time to go over the case and familiarize myself with all the paperwork. Apologies to the Judge but Marco's leave of absence could not have been foreseen.

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

COURT MINUTE

Seeing as Marco is extremely busy at this time, I will take over proceedings and represent myself and the accused. I hereby ask the judge for some time to go over the case and familiarize myself with all the paperwork. Apologies to the Judge but Marco's leave of absence could not have been foreseen.

The Court will give you at most one week to formalise a defence for yourself and the other defendants if you desire. The handing down of the verdict judgement will be moved back one week to allow time to incorporate the first defendant's submissions into the judgement.

DATED, on this 27th day of July, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[Klaus]

FERNANDO J. ULLOA Criminal defense lawyer

From: ProLawyers Co., Downtown, Vice City. P.O. Box: 08459 To: Vice City Courthouse, Downtown, Vice City. P.O. Box: 00101

Your honor, my apologies for the delay. As you know this case is quite big so I'll first reply to the evidence that has been presented and will then move on to my requests to the Prosecution in my next post.

Dated 19th November, 2016

http://i.imgur.com/UDvuaCG.jpg (1) http://i.imgur.com/4CoIVO8.jpg (2) http://i.imgur.com/jmKHnv4.jpg (3) (part of the evidence used for a Warrant Request for Havana House #233)

This evidence represents then-FBI Director Kessu / Kim Purp Lee (refered to as: Kessu following this line) simply being in the front of his house with Ninth Avenue Razors members trespassing his property.

After being warned to leave, one of them, identified later as [NAR]Gomiro, proceeds to defecate on Kessu's house door.

This does not end here, however; one of the gang members takes out weapons from Property #233 which is later used to attack Kessu and several other officers present nearby.

Luckily for the VCPD and the civilian populace of VC, the officers fend off the attack and the assailants are sent to the hospital with multiple gun wounds.

Kessu was assaulted simply due to living in Little Havana (NAR's 'stronghold'), which is often deemed as a no-go zone by inexperienced / new police officers.
This has to stop.

Here, your honor, we are presented with some photographs that apparently consist of evidence towards the accused. I suggest we take a closer look at this evidence though.

The evidence shows several men being suspected by the police for Tresspassing and then being killed by the police. The fact all of these men die however means that no actions of theirs are related to this court case (Gomiro, etc etc). The only thing this evidence proves is that Private Property #233 is related to the crimes. This however does not mean anyone but the Property owner is responsible. I would like to ask the Prosecution where their evidence is showing that the men involved are associated with the Ninth Avenue Razors. There is nothing there that I can see that incriminates any of my clients apart from Klaus (owner of property). There is nothing in the above evidence showing the reasoning behind the attack either. All the talk about Havana, The Ninth Avenue Razors etc. is just a conspiracy.

Dated 19th November, 2016

http://i.imgur.com/3uBPGGY.jpg (4) http://i.imgur.com/WVsza5U.jpg (5) http://i.imgur.com/CwngBPW.jpg (6) http://i.imgur.com/fy9CLPF.jpg (7) (part of the evidence used for a Warrant Request for Havana House #233)

This evidence represents Officer Zephyr on a regular patrol in Little Havana. The evidence shows 2 NAR members, [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Nenad retrieving weapons from Property #233, which are later used to assault Officer Zephyr and other officers assisting him.

Officer Zephyr was assaulted for simply patrolling; is this how a human being acts? There are no mitigating conditions available here; this is pure bestiality.

Officer Zephyr was lucky that there were others available to assist. However, there were and are (as NAR still remains in VC) cases of officers dying in the line of duty in the Little Havana area. How many have we buried already? Too many.

Your honor, the evidence presented above does not back up the claims by the Prosecution. There is no evidence of the accused ever physically assaulting anyone. At most there some very slight verbal abuse, however this is understandable seeing the Officer in question is Tresspassing on private property. Again I would like to reiterate and ask the Prosecution where their evidence is showing that the men involved are associated with the Ninth Avenue Razors. All the talk about Havana, The Ninth Avenue Razors etc. is just a conspiracy against my clients.

Dated 21st, 22nd November, 2016

http://i.imgur.com/naJz5NP.jpg (1) http://i.imgur.com/6xc8lLv.jpg (2) http://i.imgur.com/DDvZtIs.jpg (3) http://i.imgur.com/dkqpLJX.jpg (4)  (part of The Bombers Case (unofficial designation)

Citizens were in shock as that day multiple bombs / explosives were being planted in cars all over the city.

(1)

While the police have interrogated [NAR]Gomiro over suspicions of him being the Bomber, FBI Director Kessu has received a phonecall from [NAR]Jay in which [NAR]Jay has de facto threatened the VCPD as a whole by threatening to explode the headquarters; Washington Beach Police Department.

(2)

2 shows that [NAR]Gomiro was in fact the Bomber, or perhaps, one of the Bombers, as evidenced by explosives being present on his body.

(3 and 4)

3 and 4 prove our claims that [NAR]Gomiro was one of the Bombers as evidenced by him admitting to planting bombs on NAR's CB radio frequency and confirming the need to move his 'shit' (clearly referring to weapons / equipment / possibly narcotics, too) to the "HQ".

Again, the man in question here ((Gomiro)) is clearly seen being killed and so charges can be made on the individual. There is no evidence showing where the man got the explosives from or who he was connected to the others in question. There is no evidence here that shows my clients ((Klaus)) committing any crimes. Jay made a mistake here by making a very bad joke. It can however be proved that there were no bombs placed in the Police Station and it was simply a Hoax. Jay is willing to plead guilty on Improper use of emergency call service & causeing wasteful employment of the police however strongly appose the charges of Terrorism.

Dated 23rd November, 2016


http://i.imgur.com/dJBQv70.jpg (1) http://i.imgur.com/4mkwoZU.jpg (2) (part of #3 Weapons retrieved from Havana House #149

(1 & 2)

The Prosecution does not see anything to explain in this case; NAR member Gomiro taking weapons from Property #149. Some officers have been heard investigating a case in which a person was shot to death with an AK rifle (AK is NAR's weapon of choice, according to detectives) however this is 'banter' talk and not actual evidence we'd like to submit.

Again the man in the evidence can be seen being killed ((Gomiro)) and so no charges can be placed on the individual. I would like to reiterate the fact that again there is no evidence showing the man in question has any relation to the street gang Ninth Avenue Razors and would like it if the Prosecution can reveal their evidence to back up these claims. I also do not see how the weapon used has any relation to this case whatsoever is are clearly trying to invent more conspiracys. I would like to object, your honor, to the clear misuse by Prosecution using "banter" talk to try and paint a bad picture of my clients based on no evidence at all.

About the property in question, private property #149, I do not see how it is related to the crimes. The man is seen taking something from the property, but no evidence is shown to say it was weapons. No crimes were committed by the man anyway, he was murdered by another unknown man ((Han)). Therefore I do not see how this evidence can incriminate the owner of the property ((Gomiro)) and also is insufficient evidence to issue a warrant. 

Dated 26th November, 2016 and 9th January, 2017

http://i.imgur.com/QIhpcNb.jpg (1) http://i.imgur.com/GrzHL3z.jpg (2) (part of #4 Anonymous tips

(1)

The evidence shows FBI Director Kessu receiving a phone-call which states that NAR is going to attempt to rob the North Point Mall jewelry store. These claims were true, as shortly afterwards the police inside the mall were attacked by NAR members but repealed the attack with little to no casualties.

At the same time, the Prosecution wishes to submit additional evidence (part of police logs dated 26th November, 2016): http://i.imgur.com/KtkkcwX.png which proves the claims above.

(2)

This evidence shows another phonecall to Kessu in which likely the same anonymous person confirms that he took weapons from [NAR]Klaus's house and that he is in fact, the leader of the NAR group.

You honor, I really cannot see how this evidence can be taken seriously. Firstly, the informant has not shown sufficient evidence proving he ever spoke to my client ((Klaus)) and that he took weapons from his house. I cannot see how this can incriminate my client at all. I also again would like to reiterate my question to the Prosecution to give evidence showing my client ((Klaus)) is associated with the Ninth Avenue Razors. Just some words spoken by some individual is not sufficient evidence to incriminate my client. What's saying the informant isn't lying, your honor? What is the informant is just trying to purposely trying to incriminate my client by making false claims? Sadly we can never know the truth, but your honor, there is reason of doubt here and for that my client cannot be charged for these absurd claims.

Dated 10th January, 2017

#7 Kidnapping

The evidence specified above shows the sequence of kidnapping conducted by the NAR gang. The FBI wire shows [NAR]Klaus commanding the entire operation, further showing that he is, in fact, the leader of the group.

It also shows one of the NARs hiding 'things' in the storage of Property #165.

All of the criminals died during this kidnap ((can be proven by everyone who was there)), so no charges can be made on the individuals involved since they are dead. Again, I would like to reiterate asking the Prosecution to show evidence that the men involved in this kidnap were in fact members of the Ninth Avenue Razors. I do understand however that the evidence shown here does warrant the raid of Property #165 owned by my client ((Vermox)) and he will be plead guilty to the charges of Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties.

Dated 14th January, 2017

#6 NAR member found with illegal weapons

The evidence shows one of the NAR gang members carrying 3 explosives, a Desert Eagle (an illegal weapon) with 10 ammo and 4 Molotov Cocktails (an illegal weapon, too) after being neutralized during an illegal smuggle operation.

Again, the man is dead and therefore no charges can be made on the individual ((Klaus)). I would like to ask the Prosecution however to give proper evidence showing that this particular smuggler is associated with the Ninth Avenue Razors because I cannot see anything in this evidence to connect the smuggler to said gang. I would also like to ask your honor for the Prosecution to stop trying to falsely associate any of my clients to this street gang without proper evidence.

Dated 19th January, 2017



This evidence shows [NAR]Klaus taking 'some items' (((in script: weapons / drugs are referred to as 'some items'))) from Property #233 and afterwards being suspected for hijacking a Securicar truck containing VAJ's bearer bonds. After a chase, he is gunned down by police officers and the bearer bonds are safely transported to the bank.

Again... the individual dies and so no charges can be placed on him as he is dead. What can see is he had access to weapons from Property #233 however and therefore is sufficient evidence that the property was connected to the crimes. The evidence above does merit the warrant for the raid and therefore my client ((Klaus)) will plead guilty to the charge of Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties.

Dated 19th January, 2017



The evidence shows [NAR]Klaus retrieving some items (likely: weapons) from his house and afterwards threatening another person to leave before 'he murks him' and 'shanks him'.

It shows a suspect ([NAR]Guwop) discharging a weapon next to a police officer and resisting arrest, which results in him being neutralized by an officer.

The evidence also shows NAR members causing disturbance in their own neighbourhood rendering police officers unable to pass; only after some time, they 'let go'.

It also shows NAR members threatening Officer Silent with death ("I've got an uzi next to your head, say nothing", "Don't ever come to the hood again, or else").

The man who discharges a weapon ((Guwop)) was later killed and so no charges can be placed on this man relating to this.

My other client in question ((Klaus)) understands that the evidence is sufficient evidence to relate him with the Ninth Avenue Razors gang. However, the evidence does not support the claims that Klaus ever took weapons from his property and committing any crimes whatsoever. The most that can be seen in the evidence are some minor instances of verbal assault. Never did my client ((Klaus)) ever threaten the Police Officer's life ((Silent)). The money that the Officer handed over to my client was actually owed to him, money that the Officer in question originally borrowed from my client. Therefore there is no evidence of my client Extorting anyone. I would like to call up the Officer involved ((Silent)) to the stand and give a statement himself backing up what I have just said about him owing the money.

Summary of pleads from my clients:

[NAR]Klaus:

- Death threats - NOT GUILTY
- Kidnapping - NOT GUILTY
- Extortion - NOT GUILTY
- Conspiracy to commit a crime - NOT GUILTY
- Leading a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY (But guilty of being involved with the criminal organization)
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. - GUILTY

[NAR]Gomiro:

- Public indecency - NOT GUILTY
- Terrorist attacks with use of explosives - NOT GUILTY
- Illegal sale of vehicles (vehicle smuggling) - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry, explosive devices, narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. - NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)
- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY

[NAR]Guwop:

- Conspiracy to commit a crime - NOT GUILTY
- Death threats - NOT GUILTY
- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY

[NAR]Jay:

- Terrorism - NOT GUILTY (But guilty of other charges, please see above)
- Death threats - NOT GUILTY
- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)

[NAR]Alaa:

- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)

[NAR]Aidan:

- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)

[NAR]Brian:

- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. - NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)

[NAR]Vermox:

- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. - GUILTY

[NAR]Metal

- Being part of a criminal organization - NOT GUILTY
- Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. NOT GUILTY (Unless sufficient evidence of warrant is given)

[Klaus]

FERNANDO J. ULLOA Criminal defense lawyer

From: ProLawyers Co., Downtown, Vice City. P.O. Box: 08459 To: Vice City Courthouse, Downtown, Vice City. P.O. Box: 00101

Your honor, after carefully reviewing the evidence given by the Prosecution, there is only sufficent evidence for the raids of two properties in the district of Havana. Those are:

• Private Property #233, Havana House, Little Havana owned by client [NAR]Klaus.
• Private Property #165, Havana House, Little Havana owned by client Vermox.

However your honor, the VCPD did many raids on many of my clients here, whereas the evidence for the warrants meriting these raids have not been given by the Prosecution.

The defense, therefore, requests the following:

Evidence meriting the raids of said properties:

• Private Property #151, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Tibix.
• Private Property #149, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Gomiro.
• Private Property #157, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Aidan.
• Private Property #156, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Guwop.
• Private Property #75, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Frankie.
• Private Property #155, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Alaa.
• Private Property #154, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Georg.
• Private Property #153, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Jay.
• Private Property #162, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Metal.
• Private Property #163, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Rasta.
• Private Property #164, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Brian.
• Warehouse #166, Fudge Packing Corp., Little Havana owned by [NAR]Metal.

Unless sufficient evidence meriting the above raids can be given, then the charges on my clients ((Gomiro, Guwop, Jay, Alaa, Brian, Metal, Aidan)) of Possession of illegal weaponry & explosive devices and narcotics, as well as providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties cannot and will not hold up in court as the weapons gathered were gathered illegally under a false warrant and therefore comes under Fruit of the poisonous tree. If no sufficient evidence can be given, my clients ((Gomiro, Guwop, Jay, Alaa, Brian, Metal, Aidan)) will want $50,000 in compensation for the damages to their houses. My client Metal asks for an additional $100,000 compensation to cover the expensives of his Warehouse that was not rightfully raided, unless evidence can be given.

Innocent bystanders ((Frankie, Rasta, Georg, Guwop, Tibix)) who also had their houses raided for no reason at all are asking for sum of $50,000 each in compensation.

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

COURT MINUTE

The Court has received the defence's submissions, the prosecution may wish to respond and I will give them a week to respond. The verdict will likely need to be delayed indefinitely until substantial issues regarding evidence and testimony are dealt with.

DATED, on this 3rd day of August, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[Kessu]

Your honor, as I was recalled from retirement after this raid was completed and all the personnel handling this case (Rapture, Roy, Marcell) are no longer with the department in any way, I will be taking over the prosecution. I was also not part of the F.B.I during this raid.


After having a detailed review of the evidence as well as the defense put up by the Defendant(s), I have to say I agree with the Defendant(s).

This case is a royal scale fuck-up from the previous FBI & SWAT officials as well as the judge who warranted the raid. I deem the raids that defense brought up as having no evidence completely illegal and the judge must've been high when granting these warrants.


Prosecution has nothing to offer to this case and will not contest the defense made by the Defendants in any way, but will ask the judge to take in to consideration that the current staff in the department had nothing to do with the raids.

That is all,

Kim Purp Lee.

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

COURT MINUTE

The trial component of this case has concluded. As such the Court will adjourn and try to deliver a verdict in this matter within the next week. Any further issues with the case should be sent to my chambers.

DATED, on this 7th day of August, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

PRONOUNCEMENT OF VERDICT

For reasons which will be given later, the following verdict and orders are given. Some demands and charges are not addressed in this verdict, as they require detailed examination later on.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

First Defendant: [NAR]Klaus/James_Bond

[1].        That the first defendant: [NAR]Klaus/James_Bond, be found guilty on the charge of 'death threats'.

[2].        That the first defendant, be found not guilty on the charge of 'kidnapping'.

[3].        That the first defendant, be found guilty on the charge of 'extortion'.

[4].        That the first defendant, be found not guilty on the charge of 'conspiracy to commit a crime'.

[5].        That the charge of 'leading a criminal organisation' be dismissed with prejudice.

[6].        That the Court recognises the first defendant's plea of guilty for the charges of 'possession of illegal weaponry, explosive devices' and 'providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties'.

Second Defendant: [NAR]Gomiro

[7].        That the second defendant: [NAR]Gomiro, be found not guilty on the charge of 'public indecency'.

[8].        That the second defendant, be found not guilty on the charge of 'terrorist attacks with the use of explosives'.

[9].        That the second defendant, be found guilty on the charge of 'illegal sale of vehicles'.

[10].      That the charge of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

Third Defendant: [NAR]Guwop

[11].      That the third defendant: [NAR]Guwop, be found guilty on the charge of 'conspiracy to commit a crime'.

[12].      That the third defendant, be found guilty on the charge of 'death threats'.

[13].      That the charge of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

Fourth Defendant: [NAR]Jay

[14].      That the fourth defendant: [NAR]Jay, be found not guilty on the charge of 'terrorism'.

[15].      That the fourth defendant, be found guilty on the charge of 'death threats'.

[16].      That the charge of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

[17].      That a charge, charging the fourth defendant with 'obstructing justice' be added to the indictment.

[18].      That the fourth defendant, be found guilty on the charge of 'obstructing justice'.¹

Fifth to Seventh Defendants: [NAR]Alaa, [NAR]Aidan & [NAR]Brian

[19].      That the charges of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

Eighth Defendant: [NAR]Vermox

[20].      That the charge of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

[21].      That the Court recognises the eighth defendant's plea of guilty for the charges of 'possession of illegal weaponry, explosive devices' and 'providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties'.

Ninth Defendant: [NAR]Metal

[22].      That the charges of 'being part of a criminal organization' be dismissed with prejudice.

Miscellaneous and Provisional Orders

[23].      That the findings of guilt and no guilt be subject to further examination and potential change at the time of pronouncement and handing down of the reasons for judgement.

[24].      That the outstanding charges of obstruction of justice with respect to the first defendant, and 'possession of illegal weaponry, explosive devices' and 'providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties' with respect to the second to seventh and ninth defendants to be determined at the pronouncement and handing down of the reasons for judgement.

[25].      That the outstanding demands by the defendants to be determined at the pronouncement and handing down of the reasons for judgement.

[26].      That the sentencing of the defendants judged to be guilty, will be handed down simultaneously with the pronouncement and handing down of the reasons for judgement. Relevant submissions regarding sentencing may be made from now to the time of publishing of the reasons for judgement.

[27].      Other orders and directions to be announced at the pronouncement and handing down of the reasons for judgement.

[28].      That the State is to pay the preliminary sum of $100,000 ARD to the defendants' lawyer: Fernando Ulloa, for extremely burdensome criminal litigation.

[29].      Liberty to apply.

ORDERED, on this 15th day of September, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge



AMENDMENT NOTICE

¹ On reflection, this charge was added due to the calling made by the respective defendant to the Director's mobile. I had misapprehended that the phone call was done to the emergency services hotline or more commonly known as '911' and as such found him guilty of an offence which would've obstructed or hindered police in their duties. As the call was to a personal mobile phone and not the emergency services hotline, I am withdrawing the charge, subsequently, [NAR]Jay will not be answerable to the charge of 'obstruction to justice' at all. I apologise for the mistake.

[Klaus]

My other client in question ((Klaus)) understands that the evidence is sufficient evidence to relate him with the Ninth Avenue Razors gang. However, the evidence does not support the claims that Klaus ever took weapons from his property and committing any crimes whatsoever. The most that can be seen in the evidence are some minor instances of verbal assault. Never did my client ((Klaus)) ever threaten the Police Officer's life ((Silent)). The money that the Officer handed over to my client was actually owed to him, money that the Officer in question originally borrowed from my client. Therefore there is no evidence of my client Extorting anyone. I would like to call up the Officer involved ((Silent)) to the stand and give a statement himself backing up what I have just said about him owing the money.

Just highlighting this as I am still waiting for Silent to post his statement in regards to this.

[Silent]

I was never extorted by the defendant. I just didn't want to give him his money back after i left the gang. This made him angry and while he did threaten me he never touched me or assaulted me

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0001/2017

COURT MINUTE

Spoiler for Material & Testimony:

Just highlighting this as I am still waiting for Silent to post his statement in regards to this.

I was never extorted by the defendant. I just didn't want to give him his money back after i left the gang. This made him angry and while he did threaten me he never touched me or assaulted me

The testimony by the witness and submissions regarding the charge of extortion are noted and will be addressed in the reasons for judgement later on.

DATED, on this 17th day of September, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "United States of Argonath v Ninth Avenue Razors"

Case Name:	United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’
Medium Neutral Citation:	[2017] AFCR 5
Date of Decision:	30 November 2017
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Treblin J
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - Judge alone trial - trial verdict.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Further Offences) Ordinance 2017 Interim Constitution
Cases Cited:	United States of Argonath v Ancelotti (2010) CR 26 United States of Argonath v Amal [2017] AFCR 2 United States of Argonath v Amal [No. 2] [2017] AFCR 4 United States of Argonath v Blaze Family (2013) USACC 13 United States of Argonath v Campbell [2017] RJC 1 United States of Argonath v Campbell [2017] RJC 3 United States of Argonath v Corleone (2015) USADC 1562 United States of Argonath v Kevin (2016) USADC 2347 United States of Argonath v Gvardia[2016] AFCR 12 United States of Argonath v Mustang [2017] AFCR 1 United States of Argonath v Mustang [No. 2] [2017] AFCR 3 Vice City Police Department v Rapture et al. [2013] AFCR 2
Parties:	State (Prosecution) ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’ (Defendants)
Representation:	Counsel: Kim Purp Lee (P) Fernando Ulloa (D)

JUDGEMENT

[1].        When I initially took over this case in February, I did not imagine this case would take as long or as much brain power to conclude. To briefly observe, the ‘dark figure of crime’ in Vice City is sky high, and huge complex cases like this, unfortunately do not seem to be any closer to solving this problem.

[2].        Such a complex case like this, requires comprehensive review of the evidence, legality of charges, granting of warrants, for that reason this judgement will be tedious and long.

Table of Contents

             Part 1 - Review of Warrant Details

             Part 2 - Legality of Crimes Alleged

             Part 3 - Examination of Evidence

             Part 4 - Defence Submissions

             Part 5 - Matters of Criminal Law

             Part 6 - Defendants’ Connection to Crimes Alleged

             Part 7 - Sentencing

             Part 8 - Remarks on Prosecution Case

             Part 9 - Conclusion

Part 1 - Review of Warrant Details

[3].        The first matter to address is the warrant that was issued by Banks J. The defendants submit that there was not enough evidence to demonstrate that the warrant should’ve been legally granted and that the warrant is thus invalid.¹ The prosecution also agrees with this argument.² The Court will produce all aspects of the warrant file to demonstrate its reasoning.

[4].        The warrant file which was provided to the Police Court reads the following:³

Spoiler for Warrant Court Files:

Spoiler for Warrant Court File - Initial Application:

**Special Agent Rapture steps in, leaving a big box on D.A's desk. **

Federal Bureau of Investigation Vice City Division

Warrant request - Ninth Avenue Razors | Little Havana
To: Vice City Courthouse
From: FBI Headquarters

FBI Personnel have been investigating this gang ever since they begun, this is a compilation of evidence collected these past few months.
Investigations were led (and done by) =AV=Kessu, evidence is sorted in chronological order.

#1 Warrant Request for Havana House #233
Date: 19/11/2016
This house has been linked to crimes and it seems to be one of the main storage houses for NAR*.
Pictures show NAR members taking weapons from #233 and using them for means of homicide and intimidation.
* - also see #6
http://imgur.com/a/DMBX3

#2 NAR Gang member threatens to blow up Washington Beach PD & NAR Gang member confesses to planting bombs
Dates: 21/11/2016 & 22/11/2016
[NAR]Jay attempting to call in anonymously from a payphone, threatening to blow up the PD unless fellow gang member [NAR]Gomiro was to be released.
Confirmation over their CB that [NAR]Gomiro has been planting explosives and that he needs to move his storage over to their HQ.
Also included screenshot of explosives found on his person.
http://imgur.com/a/LodbW

#3 Weapons retrieved from Havana House #149
Date: 23/11/2016
Evidence of [NAR] members taking weapons from property #149.
http://imgur.com/a/TH0r5

#4 Anonymous tips
Dates: 26/11/2016 & 09/01/2017
Anonymous tip of an upcoming NAR jewerly store robbery.
Anonymous confirms that he took weapons from [NAR]Klaus' house while involved with his gang (Property #233).
http://imgur.com/a/CBrWE

#5 Kidnapping
Date: 10/01/2017
NAR Members involved in a kidnap in house #165, also spotted taking weapons from its storage.
http://imgur.com/a/I3QHL

#6 NAR member found with illegal weapons
Date: 14/01/2017
http://i.imgur.com/hlGyAUa.jpg

#7 **FBI Agent delivers a box labelled "NAR CASE" full of VHS Tapes
VHS Tapes containing evidence of NAR members vehicle smuggling, hijacking armored trucks, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3FjgbphMnU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nPTp_br0Lw

Given the amount and severity of the evidence, we hereby recognize that the Ninth Avenue Furies as a criminal organization are working against the United States of Argonath's interests,
given that we have proved they are in possession of illegal weaponry including terrorist grade explosives ( [NAR] Gomiro ), we request that in order to ensure maximum security of our citizens in Little Havana,
a warrant for all houses related to said organization should be issued.

NAR Properties in Little Havana:
  Private Property #233, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Klaus.
  Private Property #151, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Tibix.
  Private Property #149, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Gomiro.
  Private Property #157, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Aidan.
  Private Property #156, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Guwop.
  Private Property #75, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Frankie.
  Private Property #154, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Georg.
  Private Property #162, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Metal.
  Private Property #153, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Jay.
  Private Property #163, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Rasta.
  Private Property #164, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Paul.
  Private Property #152, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Gomiro.
  Private Property #165, Havana House, Little Havana is owned by [NAR]Vermox.
  Private Property #232, Ghetto House, Little Haiti owned by [NAR]Alaa.
  Warehouse #153, Fudge Packing Corp., Little Havana owned by [NAR]Metal.

Closing statements: Your Honor, SWAT and FBI have been battling this gang for a long time and we would like to be able to raid them and put an end to their illegal activities.
This has been going on for too long, NAR operates in Little Havana and it has seen the biggest crime raise in Vice City yet.
Evidence was collected in a span of two months, where we see an seemingly endless stream of NAR crimes; and many more undocumented ones.
Evidence gathered by: =AV=Kessu and =ULK=Sora_Blue
Evidence compiled by: =AV=Rapture

Spoiler for Warrant Court File - Judicial Response:

Warrant request - Ninth Avenue Razors | Little Havana
To: FBI HeadQuarters
From: Vice City Courthouse

Dear special agent Rapture, Chief, Director.
Due to the evidence shown in the attached document, showing both domestic terrorism, as well as heavy criminal activity, a raid on all properties owned, or occupied by the members of the NAR gang is granted, this includes houses, businesses and vehicles.
Any illegal items, or items that might help you in the investigation might be confiscated.

The warrant is valid for five days. This means that you have till the thirteenth(13) of February to perform any raids on their properties. If you require the breach of any of their properties after said date, a new request has to be filed.

Judge Andrew Banks
Vice city court
February eight, two thousand and seventeen.

Spoiler for Warrant Court File - Law Enforcement Response:

Thank you Judge. The raid has been completed and the court case will be ready soon.

Ninth Avenue Razors, led by [NAR]Klaus were found to be in possession of large stacks of weaponry, drugs and explosives.
Following an issued warrant, the following properties were found with illegal storage:
(also present photos taken during operation "Last Laugh")

- Private Property #233, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Klaus.
  Illegal Goods:
                - Explosives (4),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (300),
                - Molotov Cocktails (48),
                - Flamethrower (400)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/NQ4CJyg.jpg

- Private Property #149, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Gomiro.

  Illegal Goods:
                - Explosives (265),
                - M60 (1863),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (822),
                - Molotov Cocktails (43),
                - Flamethrower (2545),
                - Remote Detonation Grenade (32),
                - Rocket Launcher (5)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/gjwUwTf.jpg

- Private Property #232, Ghetto House, Little Haiti owned by [NAR]Alaa.

 Illegal Goods:
                - Weed (18),
      - Grenades (5),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (10),
                - Flamethrower (500),
                - Remote Detonation Grenade (27)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/rZVqELy.jpg

- Private Property #157, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Aidan.

 Illegal Goods:
                - Weed (1),
                - Explosives (54),
                - M60 (500),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (498),
                - Molotov Cocktails (25),
                - Remote Detonation Grenade (1)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/wCtyDbm.jpg
               
- Private Property #161, Havana House, Escobar International owned by [NAR]Brian.

 Illegal Goods:
                - Molotov Cocktails (20)
      - Grenades (10)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/UOYgaAp.jpg

- Private Property #165, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Vermox.

 Illegal Goods:
                - Explosives (59),
                - M60 (17),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (728),

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/jvNcAV9.jpg

- Private Property #153, Havana House, Little Havana owned by [NAR]Jay.

 Illegal Goods:
                - Explosives (67),
      - Grenades (2),
                - Bulldog Shotgun (129),
                - Molotov Cocktails (25)

Photo: http://i.imgur.com/o3QvZKs.jpg

[5].        There are numerous questions regarding the warrant, they are: is the warrant legally sound in law as to the evidence provided by law enforcement in that instance, and if the answer to that question is yes, should the warrant have extended so far to allow searching of all alleged person’s properties? The answer to those two questions is very complicated and to be brief, the warrant is somewhat valid in some aspects but cannot be in other areas.

The Ratio Decidendi on Warrants

[6].        Ratio Decidendi is latin for ‘the reason(s)’. In all future cases, this section should be examined by judges should a warrant’s validity be contested.

[7].        Firstly warrants are a tool of the state, enabling them to do specific things where they are ordinary not allowed to do due to individual liberties and/or constitutional safeguards. Under the Interim Constitution, there is no specific guidance on what types of warrants exist and the rules around how they can be granted.

[8].        However, this state has civil liberties,⁴ and thus it is the Court’s view that this state is not a police state. If a state has civil liberties but intends to be a police state, then it is either using the civil liberties as a false propagandic idea or its leaders are actually delusional. Furthermore the notion of ‘fair trial’⁵ adds to the fact that we are not a police state. Therefore, warrants are tools which should be regulated by the Courts and subject to its discretion in the criminal trial process.

[9].        Ideally, a warrant should not be granted unless law enforcement officials can reasonably demonstrate on the balance of probabilities that there is criminal wrong-doing. The reason why this is not beyond reasonable doubt is because warrant applications are not criminal proceedings, they are civil/administrative ex parte proceedings which often require ex tempore orders.

[10].      Furthermore warrants should not be granted to include all alleged members of a criminal conspiracy unless a relationship can be shown to of existed between an individual and those who have accused of committing criminal actions,⁶ again based on the balance of probabilities. The prosecution also submitted in the original indictment the charges of: ‘being apart of a criminal organisation’ of multiple defendants. This logic is not legally sound and will be further discussed in part two of these reasons.

The Current Case

[11].      It is the Court’s belief that the warrant granted was invalid, save for those whose criminal conduct was explicitly demonstrated in the warrant application prior to the warrant issuing.

[12].      To narrow this down the Court will analyse every single item on the warrant list and provide whether or not it was validly granted.

The Warrant

[13].      On the original warrant application, there are 15 separate properties that were listed. Starting off with the Havana House #233 (the ‘233 House’), the evidence provided by the prosecution in the warrant satisfies the balance of probabilities and accordingly the Court will declare the subsequent raid and the evidence of that raid as valid. The Defence also accordingly concedes that the evidence provided was valid.⁷

[14].      For Havana House #149 (the ‘149 House’), the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Gomiro, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. In the warrant file, there are two relevant pieces of evidence, firstly one of [NAR]Gomiro using his property to remove ‘items’ as suggested by the defence⁸ and a discussion regarding explosives. In respect of admitting the first piece of evidence, the defence submitted that the evidence did not show the removal of anything illegal. This submission is half correct, without indulging into server related matters (scripts), the wires show the removal of items like weapons, narcotics and any other related items. However, the evidence does not show any crimes being committed by [NAR]Gomiro beforehand, and on the balance of probabilities or more relevantly regarding reasonable doubt, there was significant reasonable doubt to indicate that [NAR]Gomiro was than likely removing items which were not prohibited by law.

[15].      With respect to the cases of United States of Argonath v Amal [No. 2]⁹ and United States of Argonath v Mustang [No. 2],¹⁰ it is better for police practice to discover illegal activities that point to the presence of items that are illegal under the Crimes (Further Offences) Ordinance 2017 rather than just evidence of an individual removing items from their property. In the later case, such effort is minimal and is a lazy excuse for conducting raids on individuals properties.

[16].      With respect to the second piece of evidence relating to [NAR]Gomiro, I find it of no relevance to the case because in that case the suspect died, it is important the alive individuals are tried for crimes that they committed and not the dead. As the Interim Constitution s IV ord VIII provides:

Any person who has died during a roleplay situation may not sue, be a witness, or otherwise be involved in a court case regarding that situation.

[Emphasis original]

[17].      Relevantly, I find there was no legal basis for the raiding of the 149 House.

[18].      For Havana House #232, the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Alaa, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. There was no evidence provided in the warrant application by law enforcement and subsequently I find on the balance of probabilities that the warrant should have not been granted. Thus the raid and any evidence of the raid are invalid.

[19].      For Havana House #157, the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Aidan, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. There was no evidence provided in support of the owner or the property being used in illegal activities thus I find on the balance of probabilities that the warrant accordingly should have not been granted. Ergo the raid and evidence of the raid are unlawful and invalid respectively.

[20].      For Havana House #161, the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Brian, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. The same conclusion as in the above paragraph can be adopted here. Thus the raid and the evidence of the raid are invalid and unlawful respectively.

[21].      For Havana House #165, the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Vermox, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. There was evidence however adduced to support the raiding of such a property. It is clear that items were used from that property in the situation to support an actual crime and thus the raid is valid and lawful. The defence also primarily agreed with this sentiment.

[22].      For Havana House #153, the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Jay, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. The same conclusion as in paragraph 19 can be adopted here. Thus the raid and the evidence of the raid are invalid and unlawful respectively. With respect to the evidence admitted in relation to [NAR]Jay’s conduct over death threats, the Court is of the view that it is not reliable enough to justify an approved warrant application. 

[23].      For Warehouse #166 (Fudge Packing Corp), the property at the time was owned by [NAR]Metal, that individual is a defendant in these proceedings. The warehouse was rented out to several tenants, several of whom are defendants in these proceedings. The search of such a property was not included nor allowed by Bank J’s warrant nor was any evidence adduced to support or justify its raid. This make the raid illegal automatically as there was no judicial approval of the raid. Accordingly the raid and the evidence of the raid are unlawful and invalid respectively.

[24].      For Havana Houses #151, #156, #75, #154, #162, #163, #163 and #162, there is no evidence supporting the warrant for the raiding of these properties and five owners of these properties (#151 - Tibix, #75 - Frankie, #154 - Georg, #163 - Rasta, #164 Paul) are not defendants to these proceedings.¹¹  It is important to note that in these circumstances, there was no evidence adduced to support that they were actually raided, nor has the defence brought any evidence to support their civil counter demands.¹² Thus I find on the balance of probabilities, that these properties were likely not raided and any compensation for such properties will not be considered. However, to be clear, if law enforcement did raid these properties, those raids are illegal and invalid.

[25].      The prosecution also alleges that they raided Warehouse #153¹³ which was owned by [NAR]Metal, also called ‘Fudge Packing Corp’, however no evidence of that raid was provided in the indictment nor was any evidence or mention of such a property put in the warrant application. I am confused and bamboozled as to its inclusion and will not be considering it in evidence or legality.

[26].      To be clear, only two properties survived the review of the warrant, that is Havana House #233 owned by [NAR]Klaus and Havana House #165 owned by [NAR]Vermox. This property and its raid evidence will be considered in regards to the charges of ‘possession of illegal weaponry, explosive devices’ and ‘providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties’.

[27].      For all other defendants, that is [NAR]Gomiro, [NAR]Guwop, [NAR]Jay, [NAR]Alaa, [NAR]Aidan, [NAR]Brian, [NAR]Vermox and [NAR]Metal, there is no evidence to support the aforementioned criminal charges. This will be addressed in Part 5 of these reasons.

Part 2 - Legality of Crimes Alleged

[28].      The prosecution alleges the following charges against the various defendants, in full they are; death threats, kidnapping, extortion, conspiracy to commit a crime, leading a criminal organisation, possession of illegal weaponry, possession of explosive devices, “providing said access of such equipment to other parties”, public indecency, terrorist acts, illegal sale of vehicles, possession of narcotics, being apart of a criminal organisation. That in itself is a lot of different charges that needs to be addressed individually to determine whether they are valid charges.

Death Threats

[29].      The charge of death threats is a charge which itself suggests that an individual has allegedly sent a message or communication to another stating that they wish to take that individual’s life. That charge is validly placed as provided for, when reading certain sections of the Criminal Law in the Interim Constitution together:

Under punishment by law enforcement, no individual may commit [...] any act harming one’s [...] health.

[Emphasis original]

Threats or plotting a criminal act [...] a criminal act is a crime

[Emphasis original]

[30].      It must be interpreted that a death threat is an act that threatens to commit a criminal act: harming one’s health. As such that act is a crime as defined by Act IV of the Criminal Law.

Kidnapping

[31].      The charge of kidnapping is a charge which can be equivocated to abduction as stated out in the Criminal Law: ‘no individual may commit  [...] abduction.’¹⁴ To read the dictionary definition of kidnapping: ‘the action of abducting someone and holding them captive’¹⁵, relevantly the term of abduction covers the criminal charge of kidnapping. To add qualified support from other jurisdictions,¹⁶ in United States of Argonath v Campbell,¹⁷ the Regional Justice Court in its ex tempore judgement held that criminal charges could have alternate names so long as they ‘fit the scope’ of actual acts or omissions prohibited by law.¹⁸

Extortion

[32].      Extortion is defined by the dictionary as: ‘the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.’¹⁹ Adopting the same principle with the charge of death threats, extortion is created by reading s III act IV and s III act I together, essentially threats to one’s wealth, property, or health.

Conspiracy to Commit a Crime

[33].      This criminal charge comes from s III act IV of the Interim Constitution.

Leading a Criminal Organisation and Being apart of a Criminal Organisation

[34].      I will be discussing the legality of such criminal charges together because it is relevant to discuss them together. Criminal organisations are a legal construct invented by the prosecution in this case and it is appropriate to say that such a charge does not exist nor can it be found in the law. Whilst such a legal construct can aid a prosecution’s case to aid and justify harsher sentencing demands, it is important to consider s II ord I of the Interim Constitution which states: ‘there shall be no law [...] prohibiting the free exercise of a group.’

[35].      Being apart of a group is a social construct and to punish individuals for merely being a part of a group, even if it is criminal would be far too harsh. Only if the individual themselves commits criminal acts will the criminal justice system intervene and initiate punishment.²⁰ This is reinforced by the extrinsic materials which support interpretation²¹ of the Interim Constitution in which Stormeus, now Chief Justice stated:

In plain English.

Your rights

• Go ahead and make a religion or group, talk however you want. Make a newspaper, have a protest, petition the government, it's all legal unless...

• You affect the safety of yourself or others.
• You disturb peace or government services.
• You block a government or private property, or you're blocking public property when not on strike.

[Emphasis original]

[36].      For this reason I cannot support the usage of such made up crime to convict those simply by association. This goes for both charges: being apart of a criminal organisation and leading a criminal organisation.

Possession of Illegal Weaponry, Possession of Explosive Devices and “Providing said access of such Equipment to Other Parties”

[37].      These charges are justified by the reasoning adopted by Treblin J in Amal [No. 2] at [7]-[9] (citations omitted):

The Court is far more concerned with the charges of possession of illegal weaponry and items. The Interim Constitution relevantly provides:

The right for private citizens to sell firearms and weaponry extended to weapons which are legal for licensed businesses (i.e. AmmuNations) to sell. The sale of weaponry that is illegal for such a business to sell is a criminal act.

[Emphasis added]

What weapons are illegal is not clearly defined by law but rather by a document produced by the Federal Bureau of Investigations titled: ‘Public Service Announcement - February 2017’ (the ‘Contraband Document’) and whilst it has no legal force per se, I am not entirely willing to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to define what is illegal as there is no relevant power in the Interim Constitution that provides such a power.

However, for the purposes of this trial and for the sake of previous authorities as in United States of Argonath v Gvardia, the Court will be upholding the prohibited items on the Contraband Document.

[Emphasis original]

[38].      For further legal basis, see the Crimes (Further Offences) Ordinance 2017 ss 2, 5. With regards to ‘providing said access of such illegal equipment to other parties’, that charge can be justified by reading the above reasons in Amal [No.2] and s III act VI of the Interim Constitution together:

Anyone taking part in an offense is guilty of that offense. Anyone encouraging, helping to prepare or to commit that offense is guilty of that offense.

[Emphasis original]

Public Indecency

[39].      This charge has a certain scope as set out by s III acts XIII & XVIII:

Act XIII
Anyone in a state of intoxication must remain out of public areas, excluding hospitals, bars, and prisons. Those who refuse to do so may be arrested for public indecency.

Act XVII
Public defecation, urination, or intoxication defined in Act XIII is illegal. Those who do so may be arrested for public indecency.

[Emphasis original]

Terrorist Acts

[40].      This charge quite far beyond what is stated as a criminal offence by the Interim Constitution and other laws but the Court defers to Stormeus’ statements during the Constitutional Proposal Discussions which suggests that terrorism was intended to be criminalised by interpretation of the Interim Constitution:²²

Allowing the police to seize weapons solely for possessing them would be illegal. This constitution has always upheld the right of citizens to bear arms. However, in criminal cases, whether police can or cannot seize weapons and assets comes down to the nature of the case.

In my interpretation, police would always be allowed to seize weapons that are illegal, since the act of possessing them is itself. The use of weaponry in an isolated case would not warrant seizing legal firearms.

If, however, a criminal, or a group of criminals, were to commit severe criminal acts such as terrorism, or were repeatedly linked to violent acts, the court could sanction the seizure of any weapons, legal or not. When these kinds of instances of firearm misuse are linked to an individual or group, it's likely that the weapons themselves are a vehicle for organized crime, and so the weapons themselves become evidence to be seized.

[Emphasis original]

[41].      It is somewhat clear that terrorism is an illegal act, after all terrorism is legal and criminal construct designed to differentiate different classes of criminals. The dictionary definition of terrorism states: ‘the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims’.²³

[42].      To clarify this charge is only warranted in circumstances where the criminal acts are so severe²⁴ and they fall within political means, that is not to say that the goal of the criminal acts are intended to be political (in the traditional governmental sense), that is rather they are intended to have an impact on the community in some way, which may mean the acts are committed for a political, religious, social or some other ideological purpose. This is the correct construction of terrorist acts.

Illegal Sale of Vehicles

[43].      Illegal sale of vehicles is an offence relating to property, this involves reading certain parts of s III, act I of the Interim Constitution together:

Under punishment by law enforcement, no individual may commit [...], acts of thievery or burglary, [...], fraud, or any act of harming one's wealth, property, or health.

[Emphasis original]

[44].      To properly read this offence, the words ‘illegal sale of vehicles’ imply that an individual is selling property that they do not own. This would essentially involve an act of thievery or an act harming one’s wealth or property and then going on to commit fraud; ‘wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain’,²⁵ simply put, criminal conspiracy involving selling of property that is not theirs, intended to result in financial gain for the offender.

Possession of narcotics

[45].      This criminal acts has certain limitations that being set out in s III, act II of the Interim Constitution and by Stormeus during the Constitutional Proposal Discussions:²⁶

Production, use, sale, distribution, and/or possession of any controlled substance is unlawful and prohibited, excluding the production and possession of marijuana in a public area.

[Emphasis original]

If you didn't read that above, weed is legal. Everything else is a no-go zone.

[Emphasis original]

Part 3 - Examination of Evidence

[46].      The prosecution has submitted extensive evidence to the court record, and in order to satisfy the defendant’s right to a fair trial²⁷, this court must embark on reviewing every single piece of evidence and determining their admissibility. I must also remark that it is the Court’s view that the evidence is extremely unorganized, was originally not submitted with relevant dates and has caused the Court to suffer significant setbacks with the writing of this judgement. Fortunately a significant portion of exhibits and evidence were already declared invalid in Part 1 of these reasons which will assist the Court in examination.

[47].      In evaluating the available evidence, the Court will firstly go through the timeline evidence in chronological order and then the raid evidence.

[48].      The first album of evidence to consider is the evidence collected on the 19th of November 2016.²⁹ It consists of three exhibits which shall be referred to as Exhibit P1-A, Exhibit P1-B, Exhibit P1-C. These form part of the album submitted as the “Warrant Request for Havanna House #233”.

[49].      Exhibit P1-A shows a conversation between FBI Official Kessu and two individuals. It is presumed from Exhibits P1-B and C that there was another individual who accompanied the two individuals prominently seen in Exhibit P1-A and I concur with this deduction. The other individual is seen taking items from the 233 House. FBI Official Kessu warns the individuals to leave his personal property or be taken into custody for trespassing.

[50].      Exhibit P1-B then shows a deceased individual³⁰ defecating on FBI Official Kessu’s property and subsequently a firefight (a shooting) between law enforcement officials and the individuals who were trespassing as seen in Exhibit P1-A.

[51].      Exhibit P1-C then records the conclusion of the firefight with three individuals being reported as deceased. It is important to note that the prosecution has charged [NAR]Gomiro with public indecency because of Exhibit P1-B³¹ but the individual who committed this crime was reported deceased at the conclusion of the firefight.

[52].      Exhibits P1-A, B & C were used in the warrant application to support the raiding of the 233 House, it is appropriate to say that this pointed towards high powered weaponry being inside of the 233 House which were used to fire at law enforcement officials³² and accordingly law enforcement had every right to apply for a search warrant of the 233 House.

[53].      The second album of evidence was also collected on the 19th of November 2016.³³ It consists of four exhibits which shall be referred to as Exhibit P2-A, Exhibit P2-B, Exhibit P2-C and Exhibit P2-D. They were also submitted as part of the album known as the “Warrant Request for Havanna House #233”.

[54].      Exhibit P2-A shows two individuals removing weapons from the 233 House with the words “the pig is back” by one of the individuals in reference to a police officer who approaches the property who is alleged to be =TDZ=Zephyr (‘Zephyr’).

[55].      Exhibit P2-B shows items being retrieved from the 233 House but other than that, no other details worth discussing.

[56].      Exhibit P2-C again shows the same activity but nothing else worth discussing.

[57].      Exhibit P2-D shows the conclusion of a firefight between various individuals from Exhibit P2-A and Officer Zephyr. With the various individuals being recorded as deceased. It is important to note no actual crimes can be prosecuted or punished from this exhibit,³⁴ merely it can only be used to apply for a warrant to search and seize the contents of the 233 House. The Exhibit also shows another individual removing items from the 233 House.

[58].      Overall these three exhibits are very fragmented and do not help in documenting an incident. They carry little evidentiary weight in prosecuting any defendant and should have been marked as such.

[59].      The third album of evidence was collected over the course of the 21 and 22 November 2016.³⁵ It consists of four exhibits which shall be referred to as Exhibit P3-A, Exhibit P3-B, Exhibit P3-C and Exhibit P3-D. These were submitted collectively as an album titled “NAR Gang member threatens to blow up Washington Beach PD & NAR Gang member confesses to planting bombs”.

[50].      Exhibit P3-A shows two officers patching up an individual they are then interrupted by a call which involves a threat from [NAR]Jay to release [NAR]Gomiro or the “pd will explode.”

[61].      Exhibit P3-B then shows an individual dying after planting an explosive, a search of the individual’s body reveals explosives. I am moved to say that the Court will not adopt the assertions put forward by the prosecution³⁶ stating that [NAR]Gomiro. If the individual who is shown in Exhibit P3-B exploded and subsequently died, how is [NAR]Gomiro standing before the Court in handcuffs? I also refer the prosecution to s IV ord VIII of the Interim Constitution for authority on this matter.

[62].      Exhibit P3-C and D must be examined together, it reveals incriminating statements from [NAR]Gomiro stating he has planted explosives and needed to move ‘stuff’ (profanity omitted) to ‘HQ’. However it is clear upon examination of the available evidence, there is no actual acts that have been committed whereby the defendant [NAR]Gomiro placed any explosives and survived (Emphasis added).

[63].      The fourth album of evidence submitted as part of the indictment is dated 23 November 2016.³⁷ It consists of two exhibits which shall be referred to as Exhibit P4-A and Exhibit P4-B. They were submitted collectively as an album titled ”Weapons Retrieved from Havana House #149”.

[64].      Exhibit P4-A shows an individual removing items from the 149 House.

[65].      Exhibit P4-B again shows the same thing. However the same individual ends up being reported dead to authorities a short while later.

[66].      I must remark, these exhibits do not contain anything incriminating, as mentioned in paragraph 14, [NAR]Gomiro was not wanted for any crimes, the evidence doesn’t indicate any individuals who committed crimes using items extracted from the 149 House and more likely than not, with regards to standard of proof, [NAR]Gomiro was likely removing items that were not prohibited by law.

[67].      The fifth album of evidence submitted is dated two times: 26 November 2016 and 9 January 2017.³⁸ But is collated together in reference to the context placed upon the evidence which is that they were all tip offs. They shall be referred to as Exhibit P5-A, Exhibit P5-B and Exhibit P5-C.

[68].      Exhibit P5-A reveals an informant ringing law enforcement to state that there was going to be a robbery at the North Point Mall. The informant then shortly after hangs up.

[69].      Exhibit P5-B reveals the conclusion of a firefight between law enforcement and the individuals with the individuals being killed. It is suggested by the prosecution that this exhibit and Exhibit P5-A are related.³⁹ However again as mentioned, all the individuals die in this scenario and I again refer to s IV ord VIII of the Interim Constitution for reference.

[70].      Exhibit P5-C showcases an informant whose identity is anonymous and cannot be called upon to swear his evidence, that [NAR]Klaus, the first defendant, is the leader of the organisation. This evidence is weak in evidentiary value and a mere assertion is not a refutation of beyond reasonable doubt.

[71].      Overall this collection has shown nothing to strengthen the prosecution’s case.

[72].      The sixth collection of exhibits placed before the Court details a kidnapping dated 10 January 2017.⁴⁰ It shall be referred to as Exhibit P6.

[73].      It reveals that the 165 House owned by [NAR]Vermox, was the subject of a kidnapping by several individuals who are claimed to be killed by law enforcement in the end upon the ascertations of the defence.⁴¹ Apart from the house being used in the act of a crime, there is nothing else worth noting as all the individuals died from the scene.

[74].      The seventh exhibit is dated 14 January 2017.⁴² It consists of one exhibit and shall be titled Exhibit P7. It is not worth entertaining this exhibit nor entering into a discussion because the individual died in this situation. Refer to s IV ord VIII of the Interim Constitution for further.

[75].      The eighth exhibit is dated 19 January 2017.⁴³ It consists of a video and shall be titled Exhibit P8.

[76].      Entering into analysis of Exhibit P8, it starts off with an individual removing items from the 233 House.⁴⁴ It then shows an individual being suspected for assault⁴⁵ and eventually being taken down.⁴⁶ Nothing else is worthy of note from this exhibit. [NAR]Klaus is not the individual otherwise, how can he be before the Court? Again refer to s IV ord VIII of the Interim Constitution.

[77].      The ninth exhibit is dated 19 January 2017.⁴⁷ It consists of a video and shall be titled Exhibit P9.

[78].      On review of Exhibit P9, it shows a number of things, firstly a conversation between [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Guwop and Silent, secondly that several items were removed from the 233 House and thirdly [NAR]Guwop suggesting to go “rob a place”.

[79].      One of the more pressing matters the conversation. It starts off with Silent, a member of the Argonath RPG Police Department, approaching [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Guwop.⁴⁸ It is clear that he is not welcome as stated by [NAR]Klaus, telling Silent to “nigga you got 1 more chance to gtfo from this hood” in quite an aggressive manner or he’ll “shank you blud”.⁴⁹ It is apparent that Silent had left the Ninth Avenue Razors⁵⁰ and sold property.⁵¹ [NAR]Klaus then states that Silent had backstabbed them and was a traitor. As well as being a FBI Snitch.⁵² They then go on to state the claim “NAR4Life”.

[80].      Silent retorts that “snitches get stitches” to which [NAR]Guwop replies “you’ll be getting a lot of stitches”.⁵³ It is apparent that [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Guwop continue to berate Silent for leaving the Ninth Avenue Razors and Silent becomes defensive of his actions to leave,⁵⁴ with [NAR]Klaus calling Silent a “punk” and a “busta” over the course of the Exhibit. When being reminded that he sold one of ‘NAR’s’ properties, Silent stated no one wanted it,⁵⁵ [NAR]Guwop states “shut the fuck up” and indicates that he has a gun aimed at Silent’s head.⁵⁶ Both parties then go on to talk about the economic loss of the property with [NAR]Klaus finally telling Silent to leave the hood and that he owes [NAR]Klaus $25,000.⁵⁷

[81].      [NAR]Klaus demands $20,000 on the spot,⁵⁸ to which Silent pays him.⁵⁹ Silent then says goodbye⁶⁰ to which [NAR]Klaus replies with “if I see you again you won’t be breathing.”⁶¹ It is fair to say that this conversation is quite drawn out but involves some serious criminal acts.

[82].      It is apparent that this conversation took place at the 233 House owned by [NAR]Klaus, with several items being removed from its premises from the start of the video,⁶² to towards the end of the video⁶³ and finally⁶⁴ when the suggestion is made by [NAR]Guwop to go rob a place.⁶⁵

[83].      This video evidence is quite detailed and findings will be discussed in Parts 4 and 5 of these reasons.

[84].      For a tenth exhibit that was not placed as part of the timeline which was not dated.⁶⁶ It involves [NAR]Gomiro selling various vehicles at Vice Port, it is not relevant to discuss any further details of this exhibit and shall be titled Exhibit P10.

[85].      Some other relevant evidences includes the outcomes of the raids. The only relevant raid evidence to consider is Exhibit P11, which shows the raid outcome on the 233 House. As well as Exhibit P12, which shows the outcome on the 165 House.

Part 4 - Defence Submissions

[86].      The defence has produced an extensive submission relating to the indictment and I thank them for the timely manner in which it was done. I will go through and put forward the relevant submissions.

[87].      With relation to Exhibits P1-A, B & C, the defence puts forward the submission that the evidence reveals nothing as the individuals for whom the exhibits focus on died. I concur with this submission. With relation to Exhibits P2-A, B, C & D, the defence puts forward the submission that the Officer was trespassing as well as arguing that there is doubt over whether the individuals focused on in Exhibit P2 are apart of the “Ninth Avenue Razors”. Whilst I will not rule on the former matter, the latter is relevant and I accept that there is no evidence to indicate that the individuals in Exhibit P2 were apart of the Ninth Avenue Razors as no extensive post-crime scene analysis was done.

[88].      With relation to Exhibits P3-A, B, C & D, the defence asserts that the individual purported to be [NAR]Gomiro, died and cannot be the individual before the Court. I agree with that submission. With relation to [NAR]Jay, the defence offered its apologies for the matter and stated that [NAR]Jay made a bad joke. I disagree with this submission but it is appropriate to say that calling an individual who is in a building and then threatening that the building will blow up if something doesn’t happen is a criminal offence.

[89].      With relation to Exhibits P4-A & B, the defence argues that an individual, who is ascertained by the prosecution to be [NAR]Gomiro, died and the exhibit shows nothing more. That is true, it is not even relevant to consider the individual’s death and his removal of items from the 149 House. This exhibit offers little to nothing as mentioned before. With relation to Exhibits P5-A, B & C, the defence suggested that the informant in Exhibit P5-C, did not even talk to [NAR]Klaus. This is correct, the prosecution has the standard of proof in such a matter⁶⁷ and it has not shown that the informant in the relevant exhibit even talked to [NAR]Klaus.

[90].      With relation to Exhibit P6, P7 and P8, the defence’s submissions have already been adopted into this judgement so I feel it is not appropriate to discuss them.

[91].      With relation to Exhibit P9, the defence submits that an individual who is asserted to be [NAR]Guwop by the prosecution, died, this isn’t relevant to consider. They also further submit that [NAR]Klaus merely verbally assaulted Officer Silent and did not threaten Silent’s life. That is incorrect in law. I will discuss joint criminal enterprise later on but effectively [NAR]Klaus stayed within the proximity of an individual who did threaten Silent’s life and did nothing about it. The defence finally submits that the money was owed to [NAR]Klaus because it was a debt. This is incorrect too because there was no contractual obligation requiring Silent to keep the property nor any contractual consequences of him selling it. With the usage of various threats and a weapon I feel it is appropriate to say it was extortion, even Silent admitted this.

[92].      The defence did not make any submissions relating to Exhibit P10 or sentencing.

Part 5 - Matters of Criminal Law

Joint Criminal Enterprise

[93].      It is appropriate to discuss joint criminal enterprise with regards to Exhibit P9 and [NAR]Klaus’ conduct. There is very few cases of joint criminal enterprise and little law discussing it. It is appropriate to start off with s III act VI of the Interim Constitution:

Anyone taking part in an offense is guilty of that offense. Anyone encouraging, helping to prepare or to commit that offense is guilty of that offense.

[Emphasis original]

[94].      This basic provision gives us a very primal view of how joint criminal enterprise works. Joint criminal enterprise works by various offenders engaging in a single or multiple crimes together. By the words: 'anyone encouraging, helping to prepare or to commit that offense is guilty of that offense” it establishes that anyone involved in an offence is essentially involved in the joint criminal enterprise. This has been seen in a variety of cases put before various courts.⁶⁸.

[95].      It should be a clear principle in law that all individuals in the community have a responsibility to be reasonably proactive in their actions. And it is clear from the evidence that [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Guwop were related together by group⁶⁹ as they both stated that Officer Silent was a ‘snitch’.⁷⁰ Whilst [NAR]Klaus did not actively nor primarily threaten Officer Silent’s life, it is clear he is part of the group that Silent attempted to leave from to which there were significant hostilities on the part of the group members about Silent’s leaving. A difference of opinions is one thing but to not tell a fellow group member to stop committing a criminal offence or make an intervening act that would’ve benefitted the victim would have avoided criminal liability on the part of those featured in Exhibit P9.

[96].      Whilst it is unclear whether or not [NAR]Klaus is the leader of the group, it is clear that he may play a major role in the group as he was the one giving the advice or explaining how the group’s property arrangements should’ve been.⁷¹ Just like the playground in a school, a ring leader may not play an active role but may refuse to condemn the actions of his friends, ultimately the ring leader should be punished and comparatively, a figurehead should be subject to criminal liability. 

[97].      On the matter of a joint criminal enterprise arising in Exhibit P9, I find that there is a joint criminal enterprise present in Exhibit P9.

Prosecuting ‘Groups’

[98].      All prosecutors should be cautious in prosecuting ‘groups’ as group members may be shielded by a protection of ‘freedom of association’ entrenched in constitutional and statutory law.⁷² This case is the second criminal ‘group’ case (as far as my research goes), the other being United States of Argonath v Blaze Family.⁷³ That case ideally shows how a group should be prosecuted and I will briefly explain the elements that should be used in order to effectively prosecute a group.

[99].      In such a case, all the individual members should have individual charges laid against them, of which those charges’ context MUST relate the defendants to one another, this may include evidence of a group or a group’s name being discussed, of which the defendants can be proven to be associated to.⁷⁴ Evidence of a group can also take the form of frequent gatherings and/or discussions about upcoming activities with one another.

[100].    Preferably the title of any proceedings should not be named against a group rather an individual unless the group is a corporate entity or incorporated association (a group which has a constitution or rules) which can be proven at law.

Illegal Raids and Compensation

[101].    With relation to the various findings of the raids being illegal at law earlier in the judgement, it is appropriate to discuss what should be done to remedy the illegality. The defence has submitted that they should be entitled to receive compensation from the raids and I agree that this is the appropriate remedy to give as two separate branches of the government have acted unlawfully in this circumstance resulting in an ultra vires act on the part of the state.

[102].    In United States of Argonath v Gvardia, Stormeus CJ stated at [1]:⁷⁵

The evidence provided by the State that the Desert Eagle and the 1100 bullets of ammunition for it is insufficient to show that it is connected to any criminality or violation of the Constitution. The seizure of all illegal arms stands, but because evidence cannot be removed from the VCPD evidence locker, the State must compensate Mr. Gvardia for the improper seizure of his property instead.

[Emphasis added]

[103].    So it appropriate to remedy the defendants who were illegally seized despite actually possessing illegal firearms. The Court will state that the seizure of such weapons remains and will not be subject to question but that the State did act illegally.

[104].    With regards to compensation on monetary value, I will not be entertaining this matter unless the defence and prosecutor do not reach an agreement and request that the Court adjudicate the matter.

The Extortion in Exhibit P9

[105].    It is appropriate to start off that the witness Silent stated he was threatened.⁷⁶ Legally Silent had no obligation to return money to [NAR]Klaus and [NAR]Klaus did not have any legal basis to demand money from Silent. With the added fact that there was intimidation done by [NAR]Guwop with the pointing of a weapon at Silent and the fact that Guwop mentioned that “you’ll be getting lots of stitches” pushes the Court to err on the side that extortion was committed in this Exhibit.

Part 6 - Defendants’ Connection to Crimes Alleged

[NAR]Klaus/James Bond

[106].    With relation to the charge of death threats, it is clear from the evidence that [NAR]Klaus was present with an individual who did threaten Silent’s life. I refer to s III act VI of the Interim Constitution

Anyone taking part in an offense is guilty of that offense. Anyone encouraging, helping to prepare or to commit that offense is guilty of that offense.

[Emphasis original]

[106].    As mentioned in Part 5 of these reasons, [NAR]Klaus was a party to the joint criminal enterprise present in Exhibit P9. For this reason I find that [NAR]Klaus is guilty of one count of giving a death threat in the secondary degree.

[107].    With relation to the charge of kidnapping, I accept the defence’s submission that the individual purported to be [NAR]Klaus in Exhibit P6 by the prosecution died, and consequently according to s IV ord VIII of the Interim Constitution, find him not guilty.

[108].    With relation to the charge of extortion, it is clear added with the fact that Silent was threatened and the fact [NAR]Klaus made a demand for monetary compensation and coerced Silent into returning the money as well as being involved in the joint criminal enterprise in Exhibit P9, I find [NAR]Klaus guilty of one count of extortion.

[109].    With relation to conspiracy to commit a crime, I cannot find any evidence other than Exhibit P9 which suggest [NAR]Klaus did engage in a conspiracy to commit a crime, rather it was [NAR]Guwop who made the suggestion to go ‘rob a store’. [NAR]Klaus was then seen removing items from the 233 House but it is unclear whether or not [NAR]Klaus even went on to assist in such a crime nor it is it even suggested by the prosecution that such a crime even happened. As such I find [NAR]Klaus not guilty of conspiracy to commit a crime.

[110].    With relation to the leading a criminal organisation charge, that charge is an invalid charge at law. See paragraphs 34-5.

[111].    With relation to the charge of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives, Exhibit P11 reveals significant quantities of illegal items prohibited by the Crimes (Further Offences) Ordinance 2017, there are six separate illegal items which were recorded by the prosecution, for each that constitutes one charge. As such I find the [NAR]Klaus guilty of six counts of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives. I note a 2% discount for these charges in sentencing as the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty late in the case.

[112].    Contrary to the prosecution listing weed on the indictment, possession of it is not illegal.⁷⁷

[113].    With relation to providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties, I confident that this charge has been met at law and find [NAR]Klaus guilty of one count of that charge.

[114].    With relation to the obstruction of justice charge, I defer not to find [NAR]Klaus not guilty of this charge per the reasoning used in United States of Argonath v Mustang at [3]:⁷⁸

Finally, there is the suggestion that the deceased and the defendant are not connected because they have different names. For the purposes of this judgement and the case, the Court rules that using a change name does not grant you immunity, exclusion or any special consideration for offences committed under old names unless a death certificate can be provided.

[Emphasis original]

[NAR]Gomiro

[115].    With relation to the charge of public indecency, there was only one instance of this occurring in Exhibit P2 but referring to paragraph 51, I find [NAR]Gomiro not guilty of public indecency.

[116].    With relation to the charge of ‘terrorist attacks with the use of explosives’, referring to paragraph 61, I find [NAR]Gomiro not guilty of this charge.

[117].    With relation to the charge of illegal sale of vehicles, Exhibit P10 provides the Court with evidence of the sale of at least 8 vehicles, I find [NAR]Gomiro guilty of eight counts of that offence.
[118].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Gomiro was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Gomiro not guilty of these charges.

[119].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[NAR]Guwop

[120].    With relation to the charge of conspiracy to commit a crime, [NAR]Guwop suggested to go rob a store. They did not have to actually go and commit the crime but the discussion and lack of further discussion, in the eyes of the Court, suggest more or not that the conspiracy to do such an act was intentional. I find [NAR]Guwop guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit a crime.

[121].    With relation to the charge of death threats, [NAR]Guwop aimed a weapon at Silent as well as saying “you’ll be getting lots of stitches”. I believe these be one count but the prosecutor may appeal if he wishes for the recognition of two counts of the offence. I find [NAR]Guwop guilty of one count of death threats.

[122].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[NAR]Jay

[123].    With relation to the charge of terrorism, I believe the evidence forwarded by the prosecution does not constitute the elements needed for terrorism. As such I find the defendant [NAR]Jay not guilty of terrorism.

[124].    With relation to the charge of death threats, the defendant did threaten to blow up the headquarters of the Vice City Police Department and by obtaining the number of an FBI Official and cold calling to give such a threat does constitute a death threat. Further relying on former Vice City Police Department Chief Legend’s submission in Vice City Police Department v Rapture et al.:⁷⁸

VCPD buildings are considered as safe harbours for the community, and all are welcome to visit for official reasons.
The general public and police personnel should have the right to treat it in that way.

The VCPD HQ, of all places should be a safe and secure environment.

[Emphasis original]

[125].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[126].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Jay was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Jay not guilty of these charges.

[NAR]Alaa

[127].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[128].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Alaa was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Alaa not guilty of these charges.

[129].    With relation to the charge of obstruction to justice, I adopt the same reasoning in paragraph 114 and find [NAR]Alaa not guilty of that charge.

[NAR]Aidan

[130].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[131].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Aidan was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Aidan not guilty of these charges.

[NAR]Brian

[132].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[133].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Brian was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Brian not guilty of these charges.

[NAR]Vermox

[134].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[135].    With relation to the charges of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. Exhibit P12 provides relevant evidence to find [NAR]Vermox guilty of three counts of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and also find him guilty of one count of providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. I note a 2% discount in the sentencing for these charges as the defendant switched his plea late during the case.

[NAR]Metal

[136].    With relation to the charge of being a part of a criminal organisation, that charge is invalid refer to paragraphs 34-5.

[137].    With relation to the charges of possession of weaponry & explosives and providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties. The evidence gathered against [NAR]Metal was inadmissible and subsequently I find [NAR]Metal not guilty of these charges.

Part 7 - Sentencing

[139].    In Mustang [No. 2], I discussed the principles of sentencing. It is appropriate to apply specific deterrence, general deterrence, denunciation and accountability of the offenders.

[140].    There was no submissions made by either party relating to sentencing and I will subsequently convict all those found guilty of an offence.

[NAR]Klaus

[141].    [NAR]Klaus was found guilty of one count of death threats, one count of extortion, six counts of possession of illegal weaponry & explosives and one count of providing access of said illegal equipment to other parties.

[142].    I will not consider the prosecution’s updated demands and focus on the original demands. In their original demands, the prosecution demanded seizing of the 233 House, a Voodoo, a monetary fine of $125,000 ARD and 45 years in jail.

[143].    For the count of death threats, it is a serious offence. I sentence the defendant [NAR]Klaus to 5 years (1 year = 1 minute from here on in) for this offence. I feel no need to take into account any of the sentencing principles for this offence based on the nature of the evidence of the offence as well as the fact it was done so in the secondary degree.

[144].    For the charge of extortion, that too is a serious offence and for the defendant to plead not guilty and be found guilty indicates lack of remorse and accordingly I must take into account specific deterrence, as such I sentence [NAR]Klaus to 20 years for this offence

[145].    For the six charges of possession, I adopt the formula from Mustang [No. 2] which have a base of $10,000 ARD for each count. I apply an additional 10% penalty to the base amount due to the scale of the arms stashed at [NAR]Klaus’ property. This base amount is now $11,000 ARD per count.

[146].    In considering the sentencing principles for this offence, I believe specific & general deterrence are needed as well as denunciation. With regards to specific deterrence, the defendant did plead guilty but I increase the monetary fine by 5%. With regards to general deterrence, the community should have the right to feel safe from continued illegal arms in the community. I further increase the monetary fine by 10%. With regards to denunciation, the offender did have a considerable amount of arms and I subsequently increase the monetary fine by 5%.

[147].    The total monetary fine is $78,441 ARD, rounded up to the nearest dollar with the 2% percent discount applied for the plea of guilty. With regards to the state’s demands of $125,000 ARD. I believe that the State has caused significant troubles to the Courts and will not be allowing such a demand.

[148].    For the last charge of providing access of said illegal equipment, I believe a custodial sentence is appropriate for the defendant in these circumstances, I sentence the defendant to 2 years in jail for this count.

[149].    In total the custodial sentence is 26 years, with the 2% discount applied. I note the time of the proceedings and subsequently deduct one year, with the final custodial sentence being 25 years.

[150].    With regards to the 233 House, I agree with the State’s demands and also adopt my reasons in Amal [No. 2] at [20] and order the State take possession of the property if the same owner is still [NAR]Klaus.

[151].    All other demands are denied.

[NAR]Gomiro

[152].    [NAR]Gomiro was found guilty of eight counts of illegal sale of vehicles. I find a custodial sentence is appropriate for [NAR]Gomiro as well as a monetary fine. [NAR]Gomiro needs to be held to account for his actions as the principles of specific deterrence should also be applied. For this I sentence [NAR]Gomiro to 10 years in jail (with considerations applied) and issue a fine of $100,000 ARD (with considerations applied).

[153].    All other demands are denied.

[NAR]Guwop

[154].    [NAR]Guwop was found guilty of one count of death threats and one count of conspiracy to commit a crime.

[155].    The defendant was quite brazen with his actions with respect to both offences. I believe a custodial sentence and a small fine should be issued.

[156].    As such for the count of death threats, I sentence [NAR]Guwop to 8 years (with sentencing considerations applied), considering he was the principal in the offence. As for the count of conspiracy, I sentence [NAR]Guwop to 2 years (with sentencing considerations applied).

[157].    As for the monetary fine, I issue a monetary fine of $5,000 ARD, I believe it is not necessary to apply any sentencing considerations to this fine.

[NAR]Jay

[158].    [NAR]Jay was found guilty of one count of death threats, for a sentence, I believe 3 years in jail is appropriate, there isn’t any particular need for sentencing considerations in this circumstance. Furthermore a monetary fine of $3,000 ARD is to be levied against [NAR]Jay.

[159].    All other demands are denied.

[NAR]Vermox

[160].    [NAR]Vermox was found guilty of three counts of illegal possession and one count of providing access of such equipment to other parties. With respect to a custodial sentence, I sentence [NAR]Vermox to 5 years in jail only for the later offence.

[159].    Considering monetary fine for the three counts of illegal possession and applying the principle of specific deterrence (adding 10% to the final fine), I fine [NAR]Vermox $32,340 ARD, with the 2% discount applied.

[160].    With respect to the private property, I order its confiscation from the defendant by the State, see paragraph 150 for reasoning.

[161].    All other demands are denied.

Part 8 - Remarks on Prosecution Case

[162].    I must note the prosecution’s case was not easy to read over, with lack of argument substantiating most of the offences and failure on the part of the prosecutor to exclude evidence of individuals who had died and could not be prosecuted. Long cases take time and effort to process, it has taken me three drafts and countless hours to come to the final verdict.

Part 9 - Conclusion

[163].    I am not satisfied with the outcome of this case but it shall do, nor am I satisfied that the criminal problems of the Vice City area will be solved but my skills are needed constantly by various courts in various jurisdictions. For now I will leave this judgement be as a pinnacle of my pain and suffering, and will return to my anime (not Hyperdimension Neptunia, fortunately I have not fallen that low). Also I note that this is my 1000th post.^yaaaaaay

[164].    As I stated in United States of Argonath v Campbell at the conclusion of the judgement: ‘iamque opus exegi, deo gratis’.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

[1].        That Orders No. 1 through to 22, issued on the 15th of September 2017 be affirmed.

[NAR]Klaus

[2].        That the defendant be convicted of the offences for which he was found guilty.

[3].        That the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 26 years, (26 minutes) to commence at the earliest date possible when the defendant is taken into custody.

[4].        That the defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $78,441 ARD, to be stripped from the defendant's bank accounts and/or if the defendant cannot pay the sum, for the liquidation of any property, businesses, vehicles or other assets to cover such fine with the rest of the liquidation funds to go to the State.

[5].        That Property #233 at Little Havana, if still under the possession of the Defendant, be removed from the Defendant’s possessions and held by the State. The State and its officials may determine what to do with the property after taking possession of the premises.

[NAR]Gomiro

[6].        That the defendant is to be convicted of the offences for which he was found guilty.

[7].        That the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 10 years, (10 minutes) to commence at the earliest date possible when the defendant is taken into custody.

[8].        That the defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $100,000 ARD, to be stripped from the defendant's bank accounts and/or if the defendant cannot pay the sum, for the liquidation of any property, businesses, vehicles or other assets to cover such fine with the rest of the liquidation funds to go to the State.

[NAR]Guwop

[9].        That the defendant is to be convicted of the offences for which he was found guilty.

[10].      That the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 10 years, (10 minutes) to commence at the earliest date possible when the defendant is taken into custody.

[11].        That the defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $5,000 ARD, to be stripped from the defendant's bank accounts and/or if the defendant cannot pay the sum, for the liquidation of any property, businesses, vehicles or other assets to cover such fine with the rest of the liquidation funds to go to the State.

[NAR]Jay

[12].      That the defendant is to be convicted of the offences for which he was found guilty.

[13].      That the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years, (3 minutes) to commence at the earliest date possible when the defendant is taken into custody.

[14].        That the defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $3,000 ARD, to be stripped from the defendant's bank accounts and/or if the defendant cannot pay the sum, for the liquidation of any property, businesses, vehicles or other assets to cover such fine with the rest of the liquidation funds to go to the State.

[NAR]Vermox

[12].      That the defendant is to be convicted of the offences for which he was found guilty.

[13].      That the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 5 years, (3 minutes) to commence at the earliest date possible when the defendant is taken into custody.

[14].        That the defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $32,340 ARD, to be stripped from the defendant's bank accounts and/or if the defendant cannot pay the sum, for the liquidation of any property, businesses, vehicles or other assets to cover such fine with the rest of the liquidation funds to go to the State.

[15].        That Property #165 at Little Havana, if still under the possession of the Defendant, be removed from the Defendant’s possessions and held by the State. The State and its officials may determine what to do with the property after taking possession of the premises.

Other Orders

[16].        That the State and the Defendant enter into negotiations for compensation over the illegal raids with the outcome of such negotiations to stay between the parties if they so choose.

[17].        That Order No. 23 issued on the 15th of September 2017 be revoked and in lieu: “any findings of guilt and conviction may be appealed by an appeal to the Supreme Court, to be done within 5 weeks of the handing down of this verdict.”

[18].        That the Court reserves the right to edit and modify this judgement, excluding the sentencing orders, within the period of one week to rectify and develop grammar, spelling and legal analysis throughout the judgement.

[19].        That everyone has a good ‘hecking’ day.⁷⁹

[20].        Liberty to apply.

ORDERED, on this 30th day of November, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

_______________________
Footnotes

1 Defence, ‘Defence Submissions’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 3 August 2017. 2 Prosecution, ‘Prosecution Reply to Defence Submissions’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 3 August 2017. 3 FBI SA Rapture, [RAID] Ninth Avenue Razors | Little Havana Street (8 February 2017) Argonath RPG Police Department <REDACTED>. 4 See Interim Constitution s II. 5 Ibid s IV ord I. 6 See also United States of Argonath v Amal [2017] AFCR 2 [3] (Treblin J). 7 Defence, ‘Defence Primary Submission Two’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 3 August 2017. 8 Above n 1. 9 [2017] AFCR 4. 10 [2017] AFCR 3. 11 Cf above n 7. 12 Above n 7. 13 Prosecution, ‘Indictment’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 9 February 2017. 14 Interim Constitution s III act I. 15 Oxford University Press, Definition of kidnapping in English Oxford Dictionaries <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/kidnapping>. 16 See United States of Argonath v Amal [2017] AFCR 2 [6] (Treblin J). 17 [2017] RJC 1. 18 Ibid [3] (Treblin J). 19 Oxford University Press, Definition of extortion in English Oxford Dictionaries <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/extortion>. 20 See Interim Constitution s II ord I subords I-II. 21 See Constitutional Proposal Discussions, 20 March 2012, Your Rights (Stormeus). 22 Constitutional Proposal Discussions, 16 March 2016, Reply to Marcell (Stormeus). 23 Oxford University Press, Definition of terrorism in English Oxford Dictionaries <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/terrorism>. 24 Above n 22. 25 Oxford University Press, Definition of fraud in English Oxford Dictionaries <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fraud>. 26 Constitutional Proposal Discussions, 20 March 2012, Criminal Law (Stormeus). 27 See Interim Constitution s VI ord I. 28 See Exhibit P2. 29 Prosecution, ‘Revised Timeline’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 15 May 2017 [1]-[5]. 30 See e.g., Exhibit P1-C; Defence, ‘Defence Submissions’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 3 August 2017 [2]-[3]. 31 Prosecution, ‘Charge List’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’, VC-CR0001/2017, 9 February 2017. 32 Above n 29 [3]. 33 Above n 29 [6]-[9]. 34 See also Constitutional Proposal Discussions, 16 March 2016, Second Reply to Marcell (Stormeus). 35 Above n 29 [10]-[13]. 36 Above n 29 [11].

37 Above n 29 [14]. 38 Above n 29 [15]-[17]. 39 Above n 29 [16]. 40 Above n 29 [18]-[19]. 41 See Defence, ‘Defence Submissions’, Submission in United States of Argonath v ‘Ninth Avenue Razors’ [9]. 42 Above n 29 [20]. 43 Above n 29 [21]. 44 Exhibit P8 at [00:02]. 45 Ibid at [00:46]. 46 Ibid at [01:36]. 47 Above n 29 [22]-[25]. 48 Exhibit P9 at [00:13][/url]. 49 Ibid at [00:52]. 50 Ibid at [02:50]. 51 Ibid at [03:38]. 52 Ibid at [02:58]-[03:00]. 53 Ibid at [03:04]-[03:09]. 54 Ibid at [03:23]. 55 Ibid at [03:46]. 56 Ibid at [04:01]. 57 Ibid at [04:38]. 58 Ibid at [04:58]. 59 Ibid at [05:11]. 60 Ibid at [05:58]. 61 Ibid at [06:11]. 62 Ibid at [00:07]. 63 Ibid at [05:32]. 64 Ibid at [07:24]. 65 Ibid at [07:11]. 66 Above n 13. 67 See e.g., United States of Argonath v Corleone (2015) USADC 1562 [7] (Marcel SCLJ); United States of Argonath v Campbell [2017] RJC 3 [56] (Treblin J). 68 See e.g., United States of Argonath v Ancelotti (2010) CR 26; Vice City Police Department v Rapture et al. (2013) AFCR 2; United States of Argonath v Kevin (2016) USADC 2347. 69 Exhibit P9 at [03:14]. 70 Above n 52. 71 Exhibit P9 at [04:12]. 72 See e.g. Interim Constitution s II ord I; Constitution of State of San Andreas s II art VI. 73 (2013) USACC 13. 74 See Prosecution, ‘Evidence’, Submission in United States of Argonath v Blaze Family, 17 February 2013. 75 [2016] AFCR 12 (Stormeus CJ). 76 Witness Testimony. 77 See Interim Constitution s III act II. 78 Deputy Chief Legend, ‘Reply Number 7’, Submission in Vice City Police Department v Rapture et al. 20 Feburary 2012. 79 If you're reading these footnotes heck to you.

JUDGEMENT SUMMARY
To be updated.
 

• This statement is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court or to be used in any later consideration of the Court’s reasons.