Justice Tempered with Mercy
•
by Wilhelm Gunter
The phrase above should be a key, underlying principle whenever a sentence is imposed upon a guilty individual.
TemujinBC is guilty – he has admitted it, and the courts have accepted his plea. There should be no one who contests this.
However, his sentence has caused controversy. Here is what was rendere😛
“An indefinite ban from the forums and IRC until TemujinBC has payed (sic) a fine of 4000 CAD to the government of eCanada
An additional ban from the forums and IRC of eight weeks, to begin the moment the above fine is payed (sic).
An indefinite ban from position of government trust and power.”
For those not aware of the reasons for this court case, TemujinBC, while in a position of authority in the government of eCanada, used the access he legitimately had, to disperse approximately $4200 CAD to various individuals in eCanada. In essence, he stole money and gave it to others.
Most of the money was returned, but not all of it. In addition, TemujinBC has appeared quite contrite after the fact. He has admitted guilt, refused to launch an appeal, and urged others not to file one on his behalf. He has agreed to abide by the sentence. I will take his words as genuine. In addition, TemujinBC is an esteemed soldier, who does much good for us on the field of battle. As leader of the Crimson Canucks, he is responsible for - I believe – about 100 Canadian militiamen.
However, should any of this play a role in sentencing? Should his sentence be mitigated by his repentance?
Firstly, the fact remains that he stole approximately $4200 CAD. What he did with it, and what others subsequently did with it, should have no bearing on his guilt. The ends never justify the means. He took what he had no right to take. That he took no personal advantage of this is immaterial. However, these factors should play a role in sentencing.
Secondly, sentencing should be penal, as near as possible bring about restitution, and be tempered with mercy, where appropriate.
Does the sentence handed down involve a penal aspect? Yes. He is banned indefinitely from a position of government trust and power. Despite his repentance and contrition, his has abused the trust given to him. Is it appropriate? Yes, in my mind it is. TemujinBC will never have the opportunity again, to repeat his actions.
Does it bring about restitution? Yes, and more. An ancient penal code stipulates for theft that the restitution needs to be 120% of the value of the theft. Since most of the funds were returned, the actual financial damage – to the best of my knowledge – is $1166 CAD. According to this ancient standard, TemujinBC would be obligated to pay the government the outstanding $1166 plus 20% of the total of his theft, which would amount to $840 + $1166, or $2006 CAD. So, I would suggest the financial penalty is too high.
And the last aspect of his punishment is his 8 week ban from the eCan forums and IRC. In light of TemujinBC’s repentance, contrition, and submission to the courts, and in light of how this ban will prevent or seriously hamper his ability to lead his militia in battles which are important to both eCanada and EDEN, this is far too heavy and not only penalizes TemujinBC himself, but the military capacity of eCanada and EDEN. This portion of the sentence, in my mind, is unnecessary, disproportionate and self-injurious to eCanada.
Please note that I have no personal, economic or military dealings with TemujinBC, the Crimson Canucks, or any of the justices who presided on this case. These are simply the observations of a citizen of eCanada.
And lastly, I no way mean to criticize our Supreme Court Justices. What they do is invaluable, and the time and effort they put into their work cannot be overemphasized. What they do is thankless, and they should be not be the target of flamers and trolls.
http://somokon.com/erep/hitcounter.png">
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I agree with most of your article Wilhelm, especially the part about the eCan forums and IRC ban. I might be new but I read all the articles and hang out in #eCan and I'm pretty sure that Temujin will be a missed asset to eCanada! o7
He should be fined 1 trillion CAD for not giving me any of that money.
we need more people like you in the Supreme Court.
lol soon in the future adjusted with inflation rate a normal fine would be 1 million CAD
FREE TEMUJIN
[removed]
and further more, why did you not address that fact, Mr. Gunter?
"TemujinBC is guilty – he has admitted it, and the courts have accepted his plea. There should be no one who contests this."
It is called the freedom to disagree. Freedom of speech.
The time they put into role-playing would do more work in real impartial law.
Another consideration - what other eCanadian has ever tanked **USING THEIR OWN RL MONEY** the way we've seen Temujin tank, never mind the all the gifting he does.
Every - Other - Country - In - The - E - Friggin - World - Would - Bend - Over - Backwards - To - Have - A - Guy - Like - Temujin - Around - !!!!!!!
But in eCanada, we fine him heavily and ban him.
The stupidity just goes on and on and on...
We are unworthy Temujin.
Did he break any in-game rules?
Good article.
Question... does the final sentence, "An indefinite ban from position of government trust and power", include voted-in positions such as congress? If so, THEN I would have significant issue. I accept a ban which would dictate he may not be APPOINTED to any position, but if the court is attempting to say he is not permitted to run in our democratic process then I would say they had overstepped their boundaries. This is not just regarding Tem, but it would be a bad precedent to claim that the Courts can tell Canadians "you can't even run to let Canada decide if you should have a position."
Any clarification on that singular point would be welcome.
very rational and reasoned article.
Article says "TemujinBC is guilty – he has admitted it, and the courts have accepted his plea. There should be no one who contests this."
Then Lucian said "It is called the freedom to disagree. "
..... maybe that freedom should be amended to require some form of rational or logic basis for disagreement. I guess what shoulda been said is that there seems to exist no reasoned basis for denying that which is known to be true 😉
"Another consideration - what other eCanadian has ever tanked **USING THEIR OWN RL MONEY** the way we've seen Temujin tank, never mind the all the gifting he does.
Every - Other - Country - In - The - E - Friggin - World - Would - Bend - Over - Backwards - To - Have - A - Guy - Like - Temujin - Around - !!!!!!!
But in eCanada, we fine him heavily and ban him.
The stupidity just goes on and on and on...
We are unworthy Temujin. "
x2
He should only be banned from the forums for a max of 2 weeks, fined the amount he hasn't yet paid back, and only banned from gov positions that hold gov money. Other positions in the gov he should be allowed, like congress or deputy positions etc. Just not any cabinet position that hold money.
The outcome of the trail is far from fair. Yes, the supreme court is important, but it needs to be a fair court system.
It does not matter if your a highly regarded citizen or a nobody... Punishment's should fit the crime. 4000 CAD, banned from any gov position is not fair.
Good article btw.
Wilhelm has the strongest moral compass of anyone I know in eRep and this article reinforces it.
Tem has paid his pound of flesh, the monies returned thus far should be deducted from the 4,000 handed down in the sentence. I find eight weeks excessive as well, particularly in light of how co-operative he's been.
"Another consideration - what other eCanadian has ever tanked **USING THEIR OWN RL MONEY** the way we've seen Temujin tank, never mind the all the gifting he does.
Every - Other - Country - In - The - E - Friggin - World - Would - Bend - Over - Backwards - To - Have - A - Guy - Like - Temujin - Around - !!!!!!!
But in eCanada, we fine him heavily and ban him.
The stupidity just goes on and on and on...
We are unworthy Temujin. "
x3
"😉id he break any in-game rules? "
After you answer that question, nothing else matters.
good article.
@ Zoecat: My article was about TemujinBC and primarily, his sentence. It was not about any other individual.
pffff......since when do people in this country know how to read, Wilhelm?