[GUILTY] United States Of Argonath vs VU.Amal

[Kessu]

Your honor,

The two cases have now been separated as per the wishes of the defense.

[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 VU.Amal" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0002/2017

COURT MINUTE

The Court now wishes to expedite the matter and finalise these proceedings, does the defence wish to make submissions on why they are not guilty? 

DATED, on this 5th day of October, 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 VU.Amal" Proceeding Number: VC-CR0002/2017

Medium Neutral Citation:	United States of Argonath v Amal [No. 2] [2017] AFCR 4
Date of Decision:	27 October 2017
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Treblin J
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - Judge alone trial - trial verdict. CRIMINAL LAW - Defendant charged with illegal weaponry charges and conspiracy to commit a crime.
Legislation Cited:	Interim Constitution
Cases Cited:	United States of Argonath v Mustang [No. 2] [2017] AFCR 3 United States of Argonath v Gvardia [2016] AFCR 8
Texts Cited:	Federal Bureau of Investigations Contraband Document
Parties:	United States of Argonath (Prosecution) VU Amal (Defendant)
Representation:	Kim Purp Lee (P) Mag Iur Ferrari (D)

JUDGEMENT

[1].        Mr Amal (the 'Defendant') stands charged with 6 counts of possession of illegal weaponry/items and 3 counts of conspiracy to commit a crime¹.

The Facts

[2].        On or around the 25th of July 2017, the Defendant’s property was used by ‘DeZ’, who is another defendant in a separate criminal trial, to conduct an illegal sale of weapons, particularly 150 bullets of high calibre machine gun known as the ‘M60’ as well as one M60 to shoot such bullets from.² The prosecution presented evidence of that transaction which is marked as ‘Exhibit P1’.

[3].        Law enforcement agencies then quickly applied to the Court for a warrant, which was granted and led to a warrant execution on the 26 July. There was nothing of interest in the raid, only revealing legal arms and a box labelled ‘NAR Pussies’.³ The prosecution presented evidence of that warrant execution, which shall be marked as ‘Exhibit P2’.

[4].        Later on, authorities then caught wind of the Defendant’s property being used by another criminal, who was later shot and killed by police. That shall be marked as ‘Exhibit P3’.

[5].        They again applied for a warrant which was granted and led to a warrant execution on 31 July. The results of that warrant execution were the discovery of the ‘Kurz MP5’ and 250 bullets of the relevant ammunition, 60 units of seed for the illicit drug Cannabis, 37 kilograms of explosives and a ‘Desert Eagle’ and 449 bullets of the relevant ammunition. That evidence shall be marked as ‘Exhibit P4’.

[6].        Lastly, the prosecution submitted that the Defendant himself placed items at his property whilst he was a suspect wanted by law enforcement. The items placed are unknown and in the Court’s opinion in determining the fate of the Defendant should be excluded from consideration.

The Law

[7].        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]

[8].        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.

[9].        However, for the purposes of this trial and for the sake of previous authorities as in United States of Argonath v Gvardia,⁴ the Court will be upholding the prohibited items on the Contraband Document.

[10].      Concerning the charges before the Court, with respect to the first charge of illegal possession of illegal weaponry with regards to the sale of M60 and 150 bullets of the relevant ammunition, that charge cannot be substantiated and the Court will be reducing that charge to ‘allowing property to be used for illegal purposes. For discussion of that charge see United States of Argonath v Mustang [No. 2].⁵ In my view that charge is far more appropriate for the facts set out with regards to the Defendant’s property. It is clear that the Defendant gave information to DeZ about where to place illegal items within his property and the most favourable inference drawn from the facts is that DeZ brought the illegal M60 and munitions into the property to conduct the illegal sale.

[11].      With respect to the third to sixth charges of possession illegal weaponry/items (excluding the possession of explosives and another item), it can be assumed that the Defendant’s property has been for the period of time between the first warrant execution and second, been used to store various illegal items. It is clear that the Defendant either knew or was ignorant of such as such for three of the illegal possession charges, the Defendant was in possession of these items as no other favourable assumption can be drawn nor has an explanation been provided. For the explosives and another item (which was placed by the criminals [VU_T]Norman4354 and [VU_T]Legend, the other item which was not disclosed in the wires in Exhibit P3), a favourable assumption can be drawn to say that the Defendant’s property was used for illegal activities.

[12].      With respect to the three charges of conspiracy to commit a crime, I find this as a duplication of the ‘allowing property to be used in illegal activities’ charges and will be dismissing them.

Sentencing

[13].      In Mustang [No.2], I discussed that there were various sentencing principles.⁶ In relation to this case, rehabilitation, general deterrence, denunciation are relevant.

[14].      In considering rehabilitation, I note that the Defendant has gained employment with the public service and find his prospects of changing his behaviour are good and will only be committing him to a monetary fine. From this finding, specific deterrence and accountability are not required in sentencing.

[15].      In considering general deterrence, the Defendant assisted in the distribution of illegal items and weapons in Vice City and the community should be aware that this sort of activity is unlawful. As such I increase the monetary fine by 10%.

[16].      In considering denunciation, the Defendant did partake or abet the illegal firearms and narcotics trade and contributed to the black economy of Vice City. I can only find that the Defendant should have his monetary fine increased by 20%.

[17].      In considering the actual sentence, the prosecution submitted that the Defendant should be fined in total: $200,000 ARD. With regards to Mustang, I noted that for one charge of ‘allowing property to be used in illegal activities’ should carry a standard baseline fine of $10,000. The Defendant engaged in three counts of such charge, as such the base fine should be $30,000. Adding the four possession charges, this sum becomes $70,000.

[18].      With respect to the prosecution’s submission that the Defendant with disregard for the law, I find that the prosecution’s sentencing submission should be taken into account and will double the fine to $140,000. I find that using the suggested fine of $200,000 too excessive considering the Defendant’s rehabilitation prospects.

[19].      In calculating the monetary fine, the Court has come to the sum of $184,000 ARD.

[20].      With respect to the private property, the Court will grant the prosecution’s submission and will ask that property be removed from the Defendant’s possession, if it is not in the Defendant’s possession then no action against the property is to be taken. The reason for such is that the property has or was become a known premises for illegal activity and the reputation of such a property should be changed.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

[1].        That three counts of the six counts of 'possessions of illegal weaponry/items' be downgraded to three counts of 'allowing property to be used in/for illegal activities'.

[2].        That the Defendant: Amal, be found guilty of three counts of ‘allowing property to be used in/for illegal activities’.

[3].        That the Defendant be found guilty of three counts of ‘possession of illegal weaponry/items’.

[4].        That the Defendant is to be convicted of the crimes.

[5].        That the Defendant be issued a monetary penalty of $184,800 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.

[6].        That Property #150 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.

[7].        All other criminal charges against the Defendant be dismissed with prejudice.

ORDERED, on this 29th day of October, 2017.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

_______________________
Footnotes
¹ Prosecution, 'Updated Charge List', Submission in United States of Argonath v Amal, VC-CR0002/2017, 31 July 2017.
² Exhibit P1.
³ Exhibit P2, see the attachments marked with ‘Box with a note’ and ‘Another box with a note’.
⁴ [2016] AFCR 12 (Stormeus CJ).
⁵ [2017] AFCR 3 [4]-[7] (Treblin J).
⁶ Ibid [11] (Treblin J).

JUDGEMENT SUMMARY
Today, the Argonath Federal Court found the defendant; Amal guilty of various possession charges and other related crimes and fined him $184,800 ARD. It dismissed the possibility of a term of imprisonment, noting the rehabilitation prospects of the defendant.
 

• 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.