THE CROWN v. D'ARKENT

[Chorale__ 2147]

SUBPOENA - THE CROWN v. PHILLIPA D’ARKENT

2nd of Godfrey’s Triumph, 1796

THE CROWN,

    Represented by OLIVIER HALCOURT of THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE,

   

    DESIRES TO SUMMON THE FOLLOWING PARTY TO COURT;

                PHILLIPA D’ARKENT

ON THE BASIS OF THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLE(S), DOCTRINE(S), EDICT(S) OR ARTICLES OF LAW:

 

202.011 - Where an individual intentionally makes an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another, this shall be assault, a misdemeanor.

202.022 - Where an individual intentionally commits upon another an unlawful act of violence which brings about lasting but not permanent injury, incapacitates for any length of time, or utilizes a dangerous weapon, this shall be battery of the second degree, a misdemeanor.

Oren Revised Code, CH202 ‘Injury Against the Person’  

206.041 - Where an individual possesses materials that are determined to be obscene to a reasonable person, this shall be the crime of obscene materials, an infraction.

Oren Revised Code, CH206 ‘On Injury against Morality’

 

The Ministry of Justice received a report, which was then turned over to the Office of the State Bureau of Investigation. After investigation, the evidence that they had collected was given to the Office of State Prosecution, namely the Attorney-General, who reviewed the merits of the case and brought formal charges against the defendant. See: Orenian Revised Code, CH209 ‘On Inchoate Offenses’, section 209.02, subsection 209.021 to consider the virtues of these charges.

 

WITH THE PRESENCE OF THE FOLLOWING RELEVANT PARTY OR PARTIES:

 

    VESPIRA D’EMYTH

    ANNA PRUVIA-PROVINS

   

    ON THE DESIRED DATE OF:

    PENDING DISCUSSION WITH DEFENDANT

 

YOURS HUMBLY,

    OLIVIER HALCOURT on behalf of THE CROWN,

    THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE, VINMARK ROUSSARD STREE 2, PROVIDENCE

    [[Chorale_#4767]]

 

[ncarr 2806]

Vespira Angelica takes the missive in hand, furrowing her brows at it. She crumples up the paper, throwing it by the countless other missives in the corner of her room. "This is garbage" she rasps as she begins to write again, small grumbles escaping her as she swiftly scribes in her book.

[_Bueno_ 492]

The elderly and nearly senile Judge Joachim Haas has decided to take this case.

[Blanchables 528]

Charles Augustus d'Arkent would carefully examine the missive, breathing a sigh of relief, as the woman named Phillipa was not his sister, and the Crown would never make such a simple mistake.

[BenevolentManacles 2232]

MOTION TO STRIKE EVIDENCE

 

It has become known to the defense that the prosecution has brought an affidavit designed to implicate my client in the events detailed in this suit to my client, who agreed to sign this document.

 

Philippa Josephine was born in 1782, making her fifteen at the time this affidavit was signed.  It should be the opinion of this court that a girl fifteen years of age, beneath the age of majority, should have a legal guardian, or counsel appointed by a legal guardian, present in order to sign an affidavit. This basic legal precedent can be derived from the following;

 

 ORC 305.013 - Minors may not consent to contracts, unless ruled otherwise by a magistrate. 

 

Edward Selm

on behalf of

Philippa d'Arkent

[Chorale__ 2147]

On 12/7/2020 at 2:49 AM, BenevolentManacles said:

MOTION TO STRIKE EVIDENCE

 

It has become known to the defense that the prosecution has brought an affidavit designed to implicate my client in the events detailed in this suit to my client, who agreed to sign this document.

 

Philippa Josephine was born in 1782, making her fifteen at the time this affidavit was signed.  It should be the opinion of this court that a girl fifteen years of age, beneath the age of majority, should have a legal guardian, or counsel appointed by a legal guardian, present in order to sign an affidavit. This basic legal precedent can be derived from the following;

 

 ORC 305.013 - Minors may not consent to contracts, unless ruled otherwise by a magistrate. 

 

Edward Selm

on behalf of

Philippa d'Arkent

RESPONSE FROM THE PROSECUTION

The Honorable Edward Selm, the Prosecution would like to remind you that there is not a set legal precedent on the definitive age in which an individual can consent to contracts. The age of majority is not explicitly stated in the Oren Revised Code, and therefore the Prosecution will not comply with the motion to strike evidence.

 

Olivier Halcourt

on behalf of

The Crown

[sergisala 3451]

THE CENTRAL CIRCUIT COURT

8th of Owyn's Flame, 1801

 

After being instructed as such by the Supreme Court, I, Sir Edward Galbraith, Justice of the Central Circuit Court, do hereby replace the former presiding Justice and assign myself to these legal proceedings, in accordance with the Legal Procedure Act.

 

As my first decision as the presiding Justice of The Crown v. d'Arkent, I do hereby summon both parties to a preliminary hearing in order to discuss the merits of the case and to rule on the Motions submitted during this case and to any other Motions that could arise within the aforementioned hearing.

 

Signed,

The Rt. Hon. Justice of the Central Circuit

Sir Edward Galbraith KM JD SSE 

 

 

[sergisala 3451]

THE CENTRAL CIRCUIT COURT

8th of Sun's Smile, 1801

 

The Court does hereby announce that the Prosecution, through the Office of the Assistant Solicitor-General, has recently dropped all the charges in the case of The Crown v. d'Arkent, and as such this Court has closed this case until further notice.

 

This is the Ruling that I, Sir Edward Galbraith, do hereby issue on behalf of the Imperial Courts, before the eyes of God and men.

 

Signed,

The Rt. Hon. Justice of the Central Circuit

Sir Edward Galbraith KM JD SSE