In order to further the Kingdom’s interest in protecting the general public, this code has been compiled to promote public safety. Henceforth, the following actions are illegal and shall come with the prescribed punishment. PvP or Violent Offences 1.1 Murder It shall be illegal to kill another person. Punishment: Fine of $50 dollars + 5 minutes of jail per instance. 1.2 Assault It shall be illegal to cause bodily harm exceeding 3 hearts. Punishment: Fine of $25 dollars per instance. 1.3 Threats of Harm It shall be illegal to threaten someone with harm or place someone in fear of harm using a weapon. Punishment: Fine of $25 dollars per instance. 1.4 Incitement It shall be illegal to convince someone to commit a crime. Punishment: Same punishment as to the crime that was incited per instance. 1.5 Robbery It shall be illegal to take, steal, or come into adverse possession of any item, monies, material, papers, property, or any other real or intangible object from any person, legal entity, organization, or the government; excluding Azalea Isle’s bank. Punishment: Fine not exceeding 1.5 times the amount stolen + up to 60 minutes of jail per instance. 1.6 Bank Robbery It shall be illegal to take any item, monies, material, papers, property, or any other real or intangible object from Azalea Isle’s bank. Punishment: Fine not exceeding $1000 dollars and 15 minutes of jail per instance. 1.7 Resisting Arrest It shall be illegal to refuse an order of a lawful entity to present yourself for arrest. Punishment: Fine of $50 dollars per instance. 1.8 Trespassing  It shall be illegal to refuse to leave a premise or property after being asked to do so by a lawful owner or manager of said premise or property. Punishment: 5 minutes of jail per instance. Government Offences 2.1 Contempt of Court It shall be illegal to refuse an order from a judge or justice in a court case. Punishment: Fine not exceeding $500 dollars + up to 10 minutes of jail per instance. 2.2 Failure to Follow a Judgment It shall be illegal to refuse to fulfill a lawful judgment. Punishment: Forcible seizure of any item monies, material, papers, property, or any other real or intangible object to satisfy the lawful judgment in full + up to 10 minutes of jail per instance. 2.3 Perjury It shall be illegal to tell any lie before any government entity. Punishment: Fine not exceeding $500 dollars per instance. 2.4 Corruption It shall be illegal for any person with any government job to refuse to fulfill their duty or use their position for personal gain or for the gain of a friend. Any person who attempts to get any person with any government job to refuse to fulfill their duty or use their position for personal gain shall be charged with Incitement of Corruption. Punishment: Minimum fine of $10,000 dollars exceeding proportional to the damage of the corruption + 60 minute jail + removal from any government job. 2.5 Treason It shall be illegal for any person to subvert national sovereignty or security. Punishment: Fine of up to $10,000 dollars + 40 minutes of jail + removal from any government job. 2.6 Bribery It shall be illegal to attempt to or actually pay someone with a government job for personal gain or for the gain of a friend Any person with any government job who accepts money in exchange for unlawful actions shall also be charged with Bribery. Punishment: Fine not exceeding 1.5 times the amount paid to the government job + 40 minute jail + removal from any government job. Miscellaneous 3.1 Unlawful Assembly  It shall be illegal to gather with others for the intention of committing an unlawful act, intimidating the general public, and disrupting government sanctioned events. Punishment: $500 dollar fine + 10 minutes of jail on the first instance. $1,000 dollar fine and 60 minutes of jail on every instance after.  3.2  Failure to Follow a Dispersal Order It shall be illegal to fail to leave an area after a lawful order to disperse has been given. Punishment: 10 minutes of jail time per instance. 3.3 Selling a Prohibited Item It shall be illegal to sell an item that you do not have the legal ability to have, possess, or control. Punishment: Seizure of Prohibited Items + a fine not exceeding $10,000 dollars per instance. 3.4 Trafficking a Prohibited Item It shall be illegal to carry on your person, on your private property, or on your personal property, any item that you do not have the legal ability to have, possess, or control. Punishment: Seizure of Prohibited Items + a fine not exceeding $10,000 dollars per instance. 3.5 Criminal Fraud It shall be illegal to attempt to use intentional deception to secure unfair gain, or to deprive a victim of a legal right. Punishment: Fine not exceeding 1.5 times the amount that was gained from the fraud and/or up to 1 hour of jail per instance. Legal Procedures for Criminal Cases 1. In any instance where a crime could give a punishment of a fine that could exceed $1,000 dollars or give 30 minutes or more of jail, a prosecutor must head the case. a. Police may still detain someone for an alleged crime under this category, however, that person must be prosecuted within the statute of limitations. b. In any instance where an alleged crimes’ punishment is less than the amount described in 4.1, Police may apply the punishment without a trial.   2. In any instance where a person may be removed from their government position, have items seized, or have an indeterminate fine based on damages, a prosecutor must have a valid judgment from a judge prior to any punishment being given.   3. A fine may only be applied by police once someone has been apprehended and arrested.   4. Police are to adhere to the Guiding Principles and Constitution. This includes asking for a warrant from the court prior to going onto any personal or private property.   5. The Statute of Limitations for all actions shall be 2 months.      

Submitting a case to the Court of the Azalea Isles is a crucial step in seeking justice within our country's legal system. The court carefully reviews each case to ensure fairness and uphold the law. They listen to all sides and make decisions based on the law and what's right. The court protects your rights and ensures that everyone is treated fairly under the law.   In order to bring a case forward, it must have standing and it must be legally actionable. Standing refers to the legal right of an individual or entity to bring a case before a court. It is contingent upon demonstrating a direct and specific interest in the subject matter of the case, such as being affected by an action. Additionally, you must show that someone has committed a legal wrong, such as a material breach of contract or run afoul of the law.  If someone has both committed an action that is legally wrong and you have a direct and specific interest in that action, you may have a case!   So what can you expect next? Well when you submit a case to the court, you have to submit it in a specific format. This format is purposely left blank, it is up to you, or your lawyer, to fill it out. The format is designed to help a justice easily review the case to understand the legal issue. The format is below:   Spoiler Thread Title:  [Plaintiff's Name]  v. [Defendant's Name] Thread Body:   [Plaintiff's Name], Plaintiff v. [Defendant's Name], Defendant   Civil Complaint: Summarize the complaint here.   Parties: Identify the plaintiff(s); defendant(s); co-defendant(s); and third parties by name. Plaintiff Defendant Co-Defendant(s)   Factual Allegations: Provide a concise statement of the facts giving rise to the claim, including the date, time, and location of the events in question if possible. Factual allegations go here With details as possible   Legal Claims: Specify the legal claims or causes of action being asserted by the plaintiff, such as breach of contract, negligence, or fraud. Legal claims or causes of action go here With reference to specific acts or violations   Prayer for Relief: Request the specific relief sought by the plaintiff, including monetary damages, injunctive relief, or other appropriate remedies. Please review the Court Orders, Powers, and Judgments thread for further explanation. Prayer for relief goes here With reference to the appropriate remedies   Verification: I, (INSERT NAME HERE), hereby affirm that the allegations in the complaint AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the plaintiff's knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.     If you need to respond to the complaint, please use the following format.   Spoiler Thread Body:   Answer to Civil Complaint: Summarize the answer here.   Parties: Identify the plaintiff(s); defendant(s); co-defendant(s); and third party(ies) by name (usually copy and pasted from plaintiff’s section). Plaintiff Defendant Co-Defendant   Factual Defenses or Challenges: Provide a concise statement of the facts giving rise to the claim, including the date, time, and location of the events in question if possible. Factual defenses or challenges go here With details as possible   Legal Defenses or Challenges: Specify the legal claims or causes of action being asserted by the plaintiff, such as breach of contract, negligence, or fraud. Legal claims or causes of action go here With specific legal defences   Verification: I, (INSERT NAME HERE), hereby affirm that the allegations in the answer AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the defendant’s knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.   Once the complaint is completed and you’re ready to go, you can submit it under the main court thread. It is important to make sure all parts of the thread are filled out correctly and completely. A judge or justice may not be able to adequately be able to review your case if it was not done properly. If you are unsure of any step in this process, it is highly recommended that you seek a lawyer to assist you in this process.   Once a complaint is submitted, the case will go in the following order: Complaint is filed by the plaintiff. A justice reviews the complaint. If it is satisfactory, a summons will be issued to the defendant. That justice becomes the presiding justice. The defendant will be notified of the complaint via the summons, they will have time to respond to the complaint with an answer. If the defendant does not respond, the plaintiff may be awarded a default judgment. A defendant may still respond to the case and request a stay of the default judgment if they provide the court with an answer. The presiding justice will then call on the plaintiff to provide opening arguments explaining their side of the case and why they should prevail. The presiding justice will then call on the defendant  to provide opening arguments explaining their side of the case and why they should prevail. The presiding judge will give time for witnesses to be called. The plaintiff and defendant will both have time to declare witnesses. The presiding justice will then summon those witnesses. The witnesses will be questioned. The side who called the witness shall ask their questions first. The other side can cross-examine the witness. Once all witnesses have been questioned and cross-examined, the presiding justice will allow the plaintiff to give a concluding statement providing a rebuttal including witness testimony to round off their case. The presiding justice will then allow the defendant to give a concluding statement providing a rebuttal including witness testimony to round off their case. The court shall go into recess and a verdict will be posted.  

This thread is for both people who want to become licensed to practice law in the Azalea Isles as well as those who are seeking a better understanding of a legal process. For clarity, the Azalea Isles is its own entity based within CityRP, any license to practice is for our roleplay law here only.   Legal practice is difficult, it is about close reading of a set of facts and applying those facts to the law. Further, it is explaining why with the combined facts and law a court should grant a particular request. This is important, as for example, as a material breach of contract may not allow you to obtain compensation past what was originally paid for under the contract. This is because even in spite of your interest in a legal wrong, there are other legal principles at play that prevent you from collecting more damages, depending on the fact set. We will go over some hypotheticals in a bit.   In the Azalea Isles, there will be four primary sources of law: the constitution, the highest law of the land; the statutes, the laws that parliament pass; court decisions, the past applications of law in a forward manner; and the “Guiding Principles”, the summarization of the existing case law of the nation.    There are additional sources of law: private law which are typically contracts or laws made between specific persons or entities; city ordinances, laws made by a local government; and treaties, which is law guiding the interaction with other nations. However, those additional sources of law are context specific and may not apply in every case whereas the primary sources likely will.   The process of understanding whether or not somebody has a case is a simple yet intensive process. To begin, first you will need complete and full factual knowledge of a given matter. The facts can be both good and bad. The facts matter because they’re the groundwork for truth in the court. In the Azalea Isles, perjury is taken seriously. Perjury is giving false testimony. The way to avoid it is to stick to the facts as given and not fib on them to make yourself or your client look better.    Asking questions are important.  This is to understand the issue at hand and  to solidify the facts. By moving through the information, you’ll come to understand what is critical and what is not. This will allow you to focus your case in resolving the most important issues in your success.   Once the facts are completely understood, the next step would be to take a look at the law to see if any law matches with the contextual background. It is recommended to look at the following:     “Guiding Principles”, as they are a summarization of past case law and may have a solution to your specific problem. The constitution. Acts of Parliament (passed laws). Past Court Cases on the matter. Any other source of additional law that may apply.   Do not be afraid to use the search function in the forums to check for key words. Further, CTRL+F will help you scan a document faster to see if there is any relevant law or not for your case. Putting it all together, you take the factual understanding of a situation and you apply it to the law. If the facts match the law, you may be able to pursue a case.    Here are a couple of hypotheticals to help you better understand the process:   Spoiler Sally enters into a contract with Kevin, written in global feed, for a conference that they are having. The conference is in 15 minutes, but Kevin does not know this. Sally is asking Fred to provide 8 cakes so she can decorate the table. Sally pays Kevin for the cakes ahead of time. Kevin however, struggles to get all the materials for the cakes and is unable to complete the full request at the requested time. In the end, he only provides 6 cakes. What can Sally do and what defenses does Fred have?   Given the above circumstances, the first understanding that you must come to was whether or not an agreement was made. In this instance, unless since changed by Parliament, the Principles of Contractual Disputes would be the controlling law here.    First, were the Requirements of Agreement met? Sally has a need and offers Kevin work for money. Kevin's consideration of the agreement was the money Sally paid upfront. Kevin accepted, either because he intentionally said yes or because he worked on the offer. Sally executed the offer by paying Kevin. With all requirements met, this would be a contract.   Next, we need to figure out what sort of breach this is. There are three types of breaches: Fundamental, Anticipatory, and Material. Given the set of facts, it is fair to say that this is a Fundamental Breach because Fred underperformed on his obligation in the contract. With this Sally has both the facts and a legal wrong that she has a direct and specific interest in (a third party to the contract would not be able to act on this) this matter. She would have a case.   What defenses does Kevin have?    Kevin could attempt to argue that the Requirements of Agreement were not met by arguing that the vagueness or lack of evidence of agreement would disable the contract.   Kevin could argue that he had Substantial Performance on the contract because he fulfilled 75% of his obligation to Sally and that was enough to fulfill his side of the agreement.   Kevin could argue that the agreement had Unconscionability because the timetable for the agreement was so tight that he was unable to make 8 cakes because his farm would not provide him the materials he would need for the agreement. Spoiler Tom is a player who has been placed on trial for Robbery. The government is accusing him of taking Calleb’s netherite armor. Given that the government needs to prove guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt, they have submitted the following evidence:   A screenshot of a conversation between Tom and his lawyer on a public discord channel admitting to the crime. Netherite armor found in a chest at Tom’s plot in a warrantless search with the same enchantments that Calleb’s netherite armor had. An agreement that Calleb would lend Tom his armor for mob hunting supplies for Calleb that Tom would return after using. A link to a court case where Calleb is separately pursuing a civil action against Tom for a Material Breach of contract.   What defenses could Tom present?   Since this case revolves around issues of evidence, the Principles of Evidence would apply. Tom in this case specifically has a lawyer, so he is being represented.   Tom’s lawyer would not be able to use a defense of Attorney-Client Privilege to suppress the screenshot of his client admitting to the crime because he admitted it publically.  However, Tom’s lawyer may be able to suppress the evidence of the screenshot Neitherite armor due to three factors: The screenshots were obtained without Proper Search and Seizure. Because the government presented evidence that it illegally obtained, it could not present it. Cross using a principle of Civil Dispute that possession of the armor did not indicate guilt of the stolen armor (since this set of armor could be a different set to what Calleb provided). Spoiler NewPlayer123 just joined for the first time. He has a hallucination of a time where he has killed other players in a fictional setting in the sky with a war involving beds. Acting on his hallucination, he proceeds to kill 6 players, forcing them to respawn at the hospital. The police arrest NewPlayer123 and he is prosecuted for the murders. NewPlayer123 does not understand why he is on trial for killing 6 players and why people are making such a big deal over a normal gameplay mechanic. What defense does NewPlayer123 have?   Given that this is talking about Criminal Roleplay, the Principles of Criminal Law would apply.    It is unlikely that Guilty beyond Reasonable Doubt will apply, as the state is very good at detecting and recording murders. Since murder is so common (because players respawn), murder is not treated as a hard crime to prove.   Given the above fact-set. It is also unlikely that Duress or Self-Defense would apply. There are no facts that support that NewPlayer123 was acting because someone else forced him too or because he had to defend himself. He openly began killing players.   The Insanity Defense may work though. This is because NewPlayer123 was not acting in proper accordance with the laws and was unaware of the customs of Azalea Isles, treating his actions in the nation the same as a separate fictional plane, perhaps aptly named a pixel up high. This can be characterized as a hallucination or conduct otherwise insane, as normal players would typically not conduct themselves in this manner (and if they are, they are consciously making the choice to do so knowing the consequences). NewPlayer123 is new and therefore did not know not to commit murder and thus may be defendable under this defense.   As you can see, the basics of lawyering is a combination of the close reading of facts and the law. While these examples are drawn from the use of the “Guiding Principles”, it is important to remember the other primary sources of law when developing your arguments. The most important aspect of lawyering other than developing cases is litigating them. The “Case Structure” thread can provide more information on how to launch a case.   For further reading on how to obtain a court award, see “Court Orders, Powers, and Judgments.”

The Judiciary is authorized by Article 3 under the Mandate for the Isles (and the Article 5 of the People's Constitution) to adjudicate “disputes within Azalea Isles, through rendering verdicts in civil and criminal trials.” The constitution stipulates one Supreme Court and allows for Parliament to establish lower courts. Lower courts and their functions have yet to be created by law, as such, the Supreme Court shall handle all cases.   Trial cases shall be between a plaintiff (the person or prosecution bringing the case forward); a defendant, or co-defendants (the person, people, or entities whom the case is against); and various third-parties affiliated with the case in some form (person, people, or entities whom are named in the case for reasons designated by a plaintiff or defendant). All persons or entities named in a trial lawsuit shall be considered the parties. All parties have the right to counsel or self-representation. In a trial, a defendant has the right to counter-sue the plaintiff if the circumstances allow so with a new complaint in the same thread.   Appellate cases shall be between an appellant (the party bringing the case forward; does not strictly have to be the losing side); the appellee (the party defending the cases, if they so choose); various third-parties affiliated with the case in some form (person, people, or entities whom are named in the case for reasons designated by the appellant or appellee); and amicus curiae whom are non-affiliated entities or persons with interest in the case. All persons or entities named in an appellate lawsuit shall be considered the parties. All parties have the right to counsel or self-representation. Non-affiliated entities or persons with interest in the case submitting an amicus curiae brief shall be known as amicae.   Cases shall be handled as described in the “Case Structure” thread, where information on how to submit a case to the court, submit an answer, and information on how a case is run.   Related Pages: For reading on how to make a lawsuit, understand the law, and make a legal request of the court, please see “Lawyering 101.” For information on Motions and Objections in court, please see “Motions and Objections.” For information on what the Courts are able to order and do, please see “Court Orders, Powers, and Judgments.”

Bill Title Author: (the individual who wrote this bill) Sponsor: (the individual proposing this bill) Type: (constitutional amendment, act of parliament, or amendment to an act) Preamble: (summary + why you feel this bill is necessary) 1. Section 1 (a) Subsection 1 (i) Subsection of subsection 1 2. Section 2 (a) Subsection 2 (if an amendment, use red to indicate what is being removed, and green to indicate what is being added). (i) Subsection of subsection 2 Enactment: (when you wish for this law to go into effect)   This is a Bill Example Act Author: Michael Scott Sponsor: MP Pam Beesly Type: Act of Parliament Preamble: In recognition of a need for an example in the format of bills, this Act is hereby made to require all citizens to watch The Office at least once per week. This will improve average intelligence and engage the nation with an informative television series. 1. Watching Requirements (a) Citizens must watch a full episode of the "The Office: US" at least once per week, with the following exemptions: (i) in the event that The Office is not available for them on an accessible service in their country. (ii) in the event that they have already watched The Office enough times to fully recite one whole episode. 2. Punishments for Failure to Meet Requirements (a) Citizens who do not meet the requirements set out in §2 shall be subject to a $1000 fine. (b) In addition, the following punishments may be issued by the court at their discretion: (i) Forced viewing of "Scott's Tots" episode or any episode after season 8. (ii) Deportation to Scranton, Pennsylvania  Enactment: This law shall be set to be enacted immediately upon its passage.   This is a Constitutional Amendment Example Act Author: Michael Scott Sponsor: MP Pam Beesly Type: Constitutional Amendment Preamble: In recognition of a need for an example amendment to the constitution, the right for elections are to be no longer necessary.  1. Removal of Elections (a) Hereby replaces "the right to vote and participate in elections as specified by law" under Article 1 of the Constitution with "the right to love the government." Enactment: This law shall be set to be enacted immediately upon its passage.   this space yes