Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Apr 20, 2004 18:52:39 GMT -5
I know I said that the last post was my last post, but shouldn't you change the Defense Attorney to swans? She is my new lawyer... Captiosus: Could you have a team of lawyers? |
|
|
|
Post by JeromeSqualor on Apr 20, 2004 18:59:35 GMT -5
That sounds great...
swans, J, and Oliver, attorney of law...
|
|
|
|
Post by Addieor on Apr 20, 2004 19:03:06 GMT -5
I'll help, too, Jerome. .......
|
|
|
|
Post by Pester, Rumormonger on Apr 20, 2004 19:32:13 GMT -5
Isn't that against the rules? Are there rules?
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Apr 20, 2004 19:40:00 GMT -5
That sounds great... swans, J, and Oliver, attorney of law... No, Cohen, Cohen and Leibowitz sounds like a much better law firm. |
|
|
|
Post by ŘỠßëřŦ on Apr 20, 2004 19:55:09 GMT -5
I'm going to do everything I can do to keep you on 667, Jerome.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jacques the Environmentalist on Apr 20, 2004 20:37:18 GMT -5
Hey what about me? I want to help Jerome too! He can't be banned he hasn't done anything seriously wrong(at least not to my knowledge). Don't ban him! I might not want to be a lawyer but I wanna help!
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Apr 20, 2004 20:41:59 GMT -5
Captious: Wow. Trials are l337. I might post pr0n if it'll get me a trial like this.
Captiosus: Kidding. For Chrissake, relax.
|
|
|
|
Post by ŘỠßëřŦ on Apr 20, 2004 20:45:02 GMT -5
Hey what about me? I want to help Jerome too! He can't be banned he hasn't done anything seriously wrong(at least not to my knowledge). Don't ban him! I might not want to be a lawyer but I wanna help! It depends on how many people are against him and how many aren't. I'm not, so I hope he stays, too. |
|
|
|
Post by JeromeSqualor on Apr 20, 2004 20:56:18 GMT -5
Wow... I never really knew how many supporters I have... For a long while, I thought I was hated to 667... It really means a lot and you are all great... I would especially like to dedicate this post to:
swans
Kimia
Oliver
J
Captiosus
BRob (Jackal)
Tocuna
MynamesJacques
luckylemon
StinkyPanda
You all rock and you really mean a lot to me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pester, Rumormonger on Apr 20, 2004 21:03:53 GMT -5
I don't know if there are any specific charges. He just got three strikes. Do you mean the rules he broke for each strike?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kobolos on Apr 20, 2004 21:29:13 GMT -5
Well, I don't think 667 has any specific rules i.e. you can't call someone a pedophile (at least without any proof)... but it is a broad set of rules so really anyone can break a rule at any time. However either due to personal vendettas or a time for true interference people may receive strikes/warnings. But other than the insults (specifically the pedophile remarks) are there other charges against Jerome? Am I to understand all the complaints against Jerome only relate to the pedophile remarks? I think in preparing a proper argument (for both sides) we need to know the specific charges.
If the Mods in question could please post the incidents where Jerome rec'd his first three strikes, I would be happy to look over the causes for the strikes with Swans...
It would help my case and I'm sure Swan's as well. I posted my concerns a few pages back and I think Jerome understands now the severity of calling someone with kids a Pedophile. As Prosecution, I would consider a plea bargain if the following concerns were met:
I think it important that this does not set a trend ie. you get three strikes, and nothing happens...the rules are plainly stated and you have to be fair to everyone that was previously on trial. Which is why I pushed for this trial to get going ain the first place.
Depending on the evidence of the strikes, Perhaps Jerome has seen the consequences of his actions...Perhaps a probation period could be set up for the defendant although be forewarned I'm not sure this "he didn't know better" rationale holds water.
That's my 3 cents, let me know something. |
|
|
|
Post by Addieor on Apr 20, 2004 21:29:21 GMT -5
Well, I don't think 667 has any specific rules i.e. you can't call someone a pedophile (at least without any proof)... but it is a broad set of rules so really anyone can break a rule at any time. However either due to personal vendettas or a time for true interference people may receive strikes/warnings. But other than the insults (specifically the pedophile remarks) are there other charges against Jerome? Am I to understand all the complaints against Jerome only relate to the pedophile remarks? I think in preparing a proper argument (for both sides) we need to know the specific charges. I think there is more in the racism thread........ |
|
|
|
Post by ŘỠßëřŦ on Apr 20, 2004 21:43:34 GMT -5
A few words...
I must say this. Jerome is a very valuable member. In my opinion, he is a very good poster. Why bann an excellant poster? And also, I think probation should be done instead of the bann punishment. Or maybe, if Tragedy agrees, we can do something like suspend him from the forum? If needed, I'll personally search for a script that can enable this to be so. I'm sure I can find one on SSD.
I also think that, seeing from Jerome's point of view, he really loves this forum. It is also plain to see that 667's addiction has befallenupon him (Who hasn't it?). I'm 110% sure that he will miss this forum terribly, so I don't think we should bann him. Maybe we can set something up. Scripts can do just about anything these days... Take his username away...Make it so that his post count goes down every time he posts, or SOMETHING. I'm sure Zach and Trag can think of something just about as much of a punishment as the bann punishment.
Hehe sorry if I sound like a defendent. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by MambaduMal on Apr 20, 2004 21:47:49 GMT -5
Oliver, is it all right if Swans takes over?
If we had someone to volunteer to be another prosecutor, we could have two lawyers for each side of the case, and then both Swans and Oliver could be defendants.
Dupin, the reason there are five jury members is so there will be no ties in the voting... I'm sorry, but I think I'd prefer to stay with five.
|
|
Proud member of the Prudish Society of America
