SFCSLQ JAG (Judge Advocate General )

[Cobramax Mechanique]

In view of recent events, it has been deemed proper to open a research and discussion thread on the precedents in Starfleet canon of a judiciary, and how this should be applied to our own circumstances in second life. Please provide documentation, (links) to back up your opinions as to how this should be done. Legal procedures from rl that should apply should also be included in this discussion.

[That Mann]

I had a posting in here, in which I clarified how the Fleet Admiral rank was treated as if it did not exist, the Fleet Admiral shown utter disrespect, thus erasing all ranks fleet-wide.

Admiral Mechanique responded that it does not concern the entire fleet, and that those it does concern have been satisfied.

On that basis, I have withdrawn the posting.

I apologize if I have wasted anyone's time.

[Cobramax Mechanique]

I opened this thread with the intention of having an open research and discussion thread on the precedents in Starfleet canon of a judiciary, and how this should be applied to our own circumstances in second life.
Instead Lt Cmdr That Mann makes a post about an event which was resolved and closed some time ago, and to the satisfaction of all involved who where able to do so in an open and honest way. I would like to have had Lt Cmdr That Mann talk to me in private about his feelings instead of a public forum, I am ingame quite a bit and am always accessible.
But, back to the purpose of this thread, lets try and proceed with it, with out hijacking it for personal agendas please.

[Ludo Merit]

I put myself in the difficult position of writing and article for SL Business Magazine about the hearings. I did so because a month before I had written an article about how Neufriestadt, the first sim with a democratic government, has set up a judicial system with the help of an English lawyer, Ashcroft Burnham. I told him about the first hearing on the day it occurred. He could not attend, but coached Admiral Mechanique on trial procedures. That is why the jury and witness oaths were those used in England.

I am very interested in the whole issue of whether we residents of SL can establish judicial procedures and laws in various groups to handle our conflicts, since many conflicts can't be taken to the Lindens to settle. Neufriestadt's legal system is a good one, based on English common law. I am not an expert on canon. I am hoping that Ashcroft will be able to help SFCSLQ as he has helped Neufriestadt, so we can set up fair laws and procedures. Admiral Mechanique hopes for the same. Let's not let this particular case get in the way of establishing procedures for future cases.

I will probably post more later.

[Lt. Commander Zed Drebin]

It seems to me that a JAG will prove to be an attention sink. If we have more trials or court martials that suck as much life out of a room as the Bellow trial, then Galaxy will surely collapse into a black hole.

[Lieutenant Xantin Olejniczak]

I have no real life links or evidence to back this up, but to my mind the following would be a reasonable way to handle things. Any disputes or issues that involve a deliberate breech of the sim rules would be handled as follows:

1) Once the members of security & counselling had made attempts to resolve any issues at 1st point at the time of the event, the officer in question should be temporarily removed from the sim to allow a cooling off period. This would also apply to any antagonists as well as any officers who had taken inappropriate measures to deal with the issue.

2) Upon return or should the event come to light after a period of time the officer(s) in question would be required to have a 1-1 meeting with their sub-division lead (or the assistant should the lead be unavailable) and possibly the division lead if necessary. If the issues involved more than one officer then following on from the 1-1 meeting a group meeting between those concerned & their leads would be called if required to deal with this and prevent any further issues. This would be documented & stored in a confidential file for use in any future issues relating to this.

3) If stage 2 were unable to resolve it or there was a recurring issue, the officer in question would be brought into a meeting with the senior staff to discuss their conduct and any possible consequences of it.

4) If this fails a closed trial would be held with an independent person as judge and the division leads as jury. Should anybody believe that the members of the jury would not be impartial or able to undertake the task with an open mind, a separate group would be selected either at random from Starfleet or requested from outside the group.

5) At any point in the proceedings a vote may be called which must be put to the whole group should any of the interested parties in the case feel that either a step of the process should be missed out or that the case should be dismissed as inappropriate. Should this vote fail, another cannot be called without the consent of the majority of the officers involved at the current stage.

Should a JAG office be established (and I will add here I would be most interested in joining it should it be created) I would recommend that at any stage from the 2nd on wards a JAG officer be present to document and guide the proceedings to ensure an unbiased and fair investigation is undertaken. In light of recent events & accusations, I would also recommend that any regulations put into place are signed & agreed to in front of a general meeting of the sim and documented to ensure that anybody from a Cadet up to the Fleet Admiral agrees that they are to apply to all.

Finally, should a JAG office be created their word would be final, an appeal process would be put in place but the office would have the authority to either call off or move forward proceedings should they be able to provide sufficient evidence that support the decision. In addition to this, any officer who feels that they are being victimized or that the proceedings are not without bias would be allowed to request witnesses or even an open trial.

Once the processes are put in place they must be clearly documented & available to all, along with details of regulations and judgments from previous trials.

That is how I personally see the best course for undertaking any future issues, it ensures that all stages are fair and balanced at that all officers receive the same treatment. Of course, the procedure would need wording to also allow for cases where the misconduct concerns a member of the senior staff but this would simply require the use of officers of equal or higher rank to undertake any interviews, etc.

Hope this is of help.

Ensign Xantin Olejniczak

Aide to the Chief Medical Officer.

[Greg Coswell]

Greetings and thank you for the chance to respond.

Once the offense was known to have violated Sim Law, or EULA for Second Life. Which is determined by;
1. If the individual wasn't out right banned from Second life by a Linden.
2. Witness to the offense reported the incident to Security also known as complaintent.

Security Officers Role

The security officer would then collect evidence, interview witnesses, and specify the charges for which he is filing the report. Procedures for how to accomplish this should be defined within that organization and subject to review by the Jag Unit.

The Jag Unit

Comprises of investigators, prosecutors, judges and judge advocate.

Jag Unit Investigator
Would read and review the initial report from security and can work with a prosecutor to determine if any additional investigation is needed. Investigators would then follow up those endeavors and file a second report with prosecutor once one is assigned. It is important that the prosecutors not interview complaintent or witnesses until they are diposed. The reason is to prevent poisoning the case or to lose objectivity.

Judge Advocate, Prosecutor

A review of the incident is then completed by the Judge Advocate, who makes the final determination if there is sufficient grounds and merit to make a case to take to trial. The determination for making this decision should then be documented for or against prosecution and submitted to the senior staff. If if is for the Advocate assign a prosecutor.

The Senior Command Staff will not have the right to influence the decision of the Judge Advocate. However, they can review and remove a Judge Advocate if deemed a conflict of interest is violated. Procedures for how this would be accomplished should be draw up before the Jag Unit is active. Perhaps a three panel review comprised of 3 Command Senior Officers would suffice.

The prosecutor thus is empowered to act on behalf of the Jag Unit. This person is empowered to negotiate an out of court settlement or pursue a court trial for prosecution. Ultimately the prosecutor reports to the Judge Advocate, who monitors the prosecutors’ case.

Judge Advocate.

If a case goes to trial, the Judge Advocate maintains court procedures and decorum. He would also rule on any settlements negotiated by the prosecution. The Judge Advocate decision is final. Any request for a retrial must be submitted to the Judge Advocate in writing. It will be up to the Judge if the merit for a request for a retrial is reasonable.

The preceding is a outline and work in progress. Clearly there is a lot more to fill in as to the roles of each individuals and procedures that must be followed to flesh out a good system.

But then again, no system is perfect.

[katrinabixby1]

Quote "I clarified how the Fleet Admiral rank was treated as if it did not exist, the Fleet Admiral shown utter disrespect, thus erasing all ranks fleet-wide."

I never saw your post! However you seem to be way off! Disrespect! seems to be your call here?
lol it was to much work creating the ranks, I would never disrespiect what I and the admiral Cobramax made?

The idea of JAG is to have a section of the group, that hears the complaints! Often they are personal room-mate to room mate, lover to lover, and the admiralty has been handling them. Usually in a progressive manner. Like temp band from the sim,
demotion, then if it continued over and over (in the Hazel case_)
we held a trial.

The point is, we would like to focus on building the group and sim
not petty arguments of "she said he said" The JAG division would manage sim av problems, with guild lines.

A formal complaint has been filed against the Defendant by the above mentioned Prosecutor: The complaint is "Violation of Galaxy Sim Rules"

First Degree - (with intent to commit a direct violation)
Punishment by: Banding from the sim and or ejection from the group.

Second Degree-
( Committed a violation, with intent to help SFCSLQ)
Punishment by: Band from the sim or group for no less then 7 days
and rank demotion.

Third Degree- (Guilty with explanation and self defense/good cause, proven)
Band from the sim 72 hours.

These were the options given to the senor officers on the (Hazel) trial. The most votes were for #1.

I should mention this member had been verbally warned, suspended from the sim for 24 hrs. at least twice.
So in summary. The admiralty would like to focus on promoting the sim and the group.

[Dwain Knight]

Well there has been a lot of debate about Hazels trial and Im aware that there is a seperate thread for that matter so I don't wish to start a debate about that here.

However I think it's important the JAG is elected to thier position and that thier decision is respected by all ranks and thier authority applies to all ranks. From a RL military perspective, being charged with an offence carries some standard punishments and it is not always the highest. At the end this should not be here just for show, it is here to protect Galaxy sim and its members in the fairest manner possible and makes all members accountable for thier behavior, regardless of rank and position. However special consideration would need to be taken in the punishment of senior officers.

If it was one rule for one and another rule for the other then it would simply undermine itself, the whole system would fall apart and ultimatly be a waste of time. By introducing this system, all sim users are signing up to the fact that they are prepared fully to accept the judgement of the JAG who has been appointed by vote by the sim users...

[gregcoswell]

While I appreciate all the volunteers that work in the Galaxy Sim on all levels, I am personally disturbed by comments that I often see on the forum or in discussions. From time to time we see volunteers request a system of democracy on a Sim that is otherwise purchased and owned by a single player who pays real money. When your a owner of a company you don’t open up the hiring and firing of its employees to a system of democracy. When you rent a house, and you invite friends over for a party do they determine the rules in your house. You don’t vote to see who gets to stay, or who gets to pass out beer. People bring what they have to offer and that share it with the group. They can choose to stay, or they can choose to leave. But to force the owner of the house to adjust his rules because you don’t like things the way they are is absurd. Calling for a major vote system where none exist is rude. Instead I say “Suggest” changes you would like to see and then see if they are implemented. I have not read any where in the forums or in the Sim where Admiral Cobramax has established a democracy. He has setup a Chain of Command from which he leads. As Chain of Command he chooses the system by which others are appointed to positions of trust and responsibilities. This constant chant I hear to have the majority vote rule on what is or is not acceptable is privilege granted to you by the owner of the sim which currently doesn’t exist formally.

If the Command structure appoints someone you don’t like to a position you yourself were not willing to fill, then you should accept it and work with it.

If you were not tapped to fill a position, do more to find out why rather that think there is a major conspiracy against you. Maybe you lacked something they saw in someone else. Work closer with that person to learn what that might be.

If you don’t the way things are. Purchase your own sim and set your own rules. It’s really that easy.

[katrinabixby1]

Thank you for the clear discussion on the topic Greg.

[zanderuralia]

as many of you may know myself and a group of others are working on the jag project to answer the rumors of the jag already existing well this is not true the admirals have not gave to "Ok Go" just yet as of now it is just a project and if and when it becomes a division i have full trust that the admiralty will deliver the message accordly thank you Ensign Uralia

[Dolamite Giffen]

I believe that a JAG corps would free the Admirals from having to Address EVERY single issue...With 600 members, it would be nice if the poor admirals could get a slight break from the constant AHHHHHH!!! I am all for it, and am helping with it in any way i can.

[Stone McCarey JAG Asst Lead]

Starfleet SLQ members,

JAG is a very simple thing to do. I believe that people are over-complicating it to a very high degree. Because of my rl experience in the courtroom both judging mock trials and being an legal advocate myself, maybe I am just speaking for myself.

Quantity in notecards on the topic is no substitute for quality. Aside from the document I attached (see below), the only thing that is necessary are firm "statute" - rules to go by, for the sim.

KEEP IT SIMPLE. Brevity.

It is not our job to "prosecute" EULA or TOS violations - that's the job of Linden Labs. Our job is to have a system in place where all members know exactly what is okay, and what is not. No more impropriety of conduct violations, that are subjective judged and summarily dispensed with by banning the person. Way too subjective.

It is not JAGs job to write the same statutes that they will prosecute people with. It's too self-serving and a conflict of interest because who would write something they would lose with? Although JAG SHOULD advise the writing of these to make them clear, concise, and non-redundant it is the job of the people SUBJECT to the law/rules to determine what is acceptable and what is not in this sim. Basically - the members as a whole should write them with JAG assistance. I would be more than willing to volunteer my time.


Below is the structure and procedure of our JAG process. Note that the prosecution is independent from the judge. Even the appearance of impropriety will make a mockery of the JAG process itself and of the sim. Proper evidence admissions are required in addition to a grasp of hearsay doctrine - what comes in and what is inherently unreliable.

Until experience in the system is actually used, it is doomed to fail.

Just my two cents.

Ensign Stone McCarey
Asst. Lead - SLQ JAG





StafleetCommandSLQ JAG CORPS EXPLAINED
Written by Ensign Stone McCarey, 10:00 PM, 2/13/07

CURRENT JAG CORPS MEMBERS:
------------------------------
Lieutenant (J.G.) Zander Uralia (Lead)
Ensign Stone McCarey (Asst. Lead)
Ensign Dolomite Giffin
Ensign Jordguitar Flasheart
Officer Candidate Afalalota Cummings
Officer Candidate Nadir Taov
(ADDITIONAL SPOTS TO BE ANNOUNCED!)

STRUCTURE
------------------------------

Admiral(s) ---
|
JAG (Division)
|
|
|
Trial Division
|
|
---------------------------------------------
| | |
| | |
Defense Judge(s) Prosecution
Investigations/Intelligence


PURPOSE OF JAG
----------------
The purpose of JAG is to ensure fairness to all officers. It ensures this by creating an independent, fact-finding and adjudicatory branch of StarfleetCommandSLQ in Galaxy to handle disciplinary actions in an open and fair manner. JAG members alone will handle all disciplinary matters for officers that have obtained the rank of Ensign and above. Judges, Prosecution, and Defense Counsel operate in a set rotating basis. Those Ensign and below, such as Cadets, will be summarily subjected to NJP (Non-Judicial Process) for violations of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the command structure. Additionally, JAG officers act in an advisory role as to proposed regulations.

PROCESS (Should take less than a week and a half)
----------------
SLQ Officer submits anonymous complaint to JAG
|
|
|
|
(1) Prosecution Begins Factfinding
(2) Decides as to whether prima facie showing
can be made that a violations of rules have occured
if so, charges are pressed
|
|
|
|
(1) Judge is assigned by rotation.
|
|
|
|
(1) Defendant is arraigned. Enters plea. Case put on docket.
(2) Defense counsel assigned
|
|
|
|
Possible Settlement
|
|
|
|
TRIAL PROCESS
(1) Prosecution's Case in Chief
-Opening statements by both parties
-Prosecution calls it's witnesses
-Defense cross examines
(2) Defense's Case in Chief
-Defense calls it's witnesses
-Prosecution cross examines
(3) Defense Closing Argument
(4) Prosecution Closing Argument

[Ensign Markius Faulkner]

Okay, I must inquire about this, its been too long since the last update on this topic, and I for one think that it is well over due.

Any information would be appreciated, all information on a lime line of the progress would be well thanked.