ko531
Citizen
Magistrate
Education Department
Supporter
4th Anniversary
Legal Eagle
Popular in the Polls
3rd Anniversary
ko531
Magistrate
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2022
- Messages
- 1,504
- Thread Author
- #1
Username: ko531
I am representing myself
What Case are you Appealing?: [2024] FCR 124
Link to the Original Case: Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ko531 [2024] FCR 124
Basis for Appeal: This Verdict set dangerous precedent as it possibly violated 3 of my rights. Rights VII, XIII, and XVI.
Right VII States:
"Criminals, although broke the law, are still citizens of the server and therefore entitled to their rights."
Yet the verdict to [2024] FCR 124 says:
"It is the opinion of this here Court that individuals who commit crimes repeatedly forfeit their right to light sentences in the future for the continued damage they cause."
This verdict is clearly saying that Criminals do not have the same rights as Citizen which would go direct right VII. Criminals are citizens first and by separating them and the rights endowed to them violates the constitution.
Right XIII states:
"Every citizen is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without unfair discrimination and, in particular, without unfair discrimination based on political belief or social status."
This Verdict goes complete against this right by saying that sentencing for normal citizens and criminals are not equal. There are now different guidelines depending on the person being sentencing. Two people can do identical crimes with criminal histories for said crime but receive completely different sentences because of a past that cant not be changed.
Right XVI states:
"No citizen shall be tried or punished again for an offence regarding a single criminal act for which they have already been finally convicted or acquitted of, in accordance with the law."
This verdict in its essences is punishing people for criminal acts again. The only reason the verdict states I can not be viewed lightly is because of previous criminal acts I have already served the crime for. I am being punished with harsher sentences for my criminal history of crimes already served. How would this not be getting punished twice for a single criminal act?
Finally I must say, I am guilty of the bribery charge in this case and I am not asking this court to throw out that conviction. I am asking however that the sentencing guidelines in this verdict to be thrown out as the terrible unconstitutional precedent it is. I will also be asking this court to review the sentence given to me for this crime as the guidelines used for it were again unconstitutional. I was a first time offender in Bribery and almost received the maximum sentence.
Another thing, I wish for the Frivolous Lawsuit to be removed from the sentencing. I did not start the case. The case was forced onto me to defend. I made a defense and the Judge ruled it so bad that it was Frivolous? This is terrible, I didn't ask to defend myself in this case but I had to for what I believed was an unconstitutional sentencing policy yet it was frivolous. Would the judge rather a citizen who believes their rights are being violated to just let their rights be violated? Constitutional rights are sacred so if there is any reasonable argument to be made about them being violated it should be heard and not thrown out for being frivolous. It is also weird for their to be no standing found as stated in the verdict when Im arguing against a sentencing guideline that was currently being used against me in the very case being argued.
Supporting Evidence:
I am representing myself
What Case are you Appealing?: [2024] FCR 124
Link to the Original Case: Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ko531 [2024] FCR 124
Basis for Appeal: This Verdict set dangerous precedent as it possibly violated 3 of my rights. Rights VII, XIII, and XVI.
Right VII States:
"Criminals, although broke the law, are still citizens of the server and therefore entitled to their rights."
Yet the verdict to [2024] FCR 124 says:
"It is the opinion of this here Court that individuals who commit crimes repeatedly forfeit their right to light sentences in the future for the continued damage they cause."
This verdict is clearly saying that Criminals do not have the same rights as Citizen which would go direct right VII. Criminals are citizens first and by separating them and the rights endowed to them violates the constitution.
Right XIII states:
"Every citizen is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without unfair discrimination and, in particular, without unfair discrimination based on political belief or social status."
This Verdict goes complete against this right by saying that sentencing for normal citizens and criminals are not equal. There are now different guidelines depending on the person being sentencing. Two people can do identical crimes with criminal histories for said crime but receive completely different sentences because of a past that cant not be changed.
Right XVI states:
"No citizen shall be tried or punished again for an offence regarding a single criminal act for which they have already been finally convicted or acquitted of, in accordance with the law."
This verdict in its essences is punishing people for criminal acts again. The only reason the verdict states I can not be viewed lightly is because of previous criminal acts I have already served the crime for. I am being punished with harsher sentences for my criminal history of crimes already served. How would this not be getting punished twice for a single criminal act?
Finally I must say, I am guilty of the bribery charge in this case and I am not asking this court to throw out that conviction. I am asking however that the sentencing guidelines in this verdict to be thrown out as the terrible unconstitutional precedent it is. I will also be asking this court to review the sentence given to me for this crime as the guidelines used for it were again unconstitutional. I was a first time offender in Bribery and almost received the maximum sentence.
Another thing, I wish for the Frivolous Lawsuit to be removed from the sentencing. I did not start the case. The case was forced onto me to defend. I made a defense and the Judge ruled it so bad that it was Frivolous? This is terrible, I didn't ask to defend myself in this case but I had to for what I believed was an unconstitutional sentencing policy yet it was frivolous. Would the judge rather a citizen who believes their rights are being violated to just let their rights be violated? Constitutional rights are sacred so if there is any reasonable argument to be made about them being violated it should be heard and not thrown out for being frivolous. It is also weird for their to be no standing found as stated in the verdict when Im arguing against a sentencing guideline that was currently being used against me in the very case being argued.
Supporting Evidence:
Last edited:
