When ever there is a court a jury and other important facts there is the defendant the prosecution and of course the lawyer. Though in this case the party of both has to be the same so if we included a person who bought a lawyer in MD for say 1 silver for that case the person would not be able to appear in court if the other person choose to represent them selves. Though I still see a way to implicate this.

The second job of a lawyer is rather simple and that is legal and mental coaching prior and after a trial. That's where I want to come in. I have a high school level of information on criminal and civil law suites and there execution. With this current case and a few future ones I will be offering this service for free just to test it out and see how much I can actually do and swede opinions and maybe even suggest a plea bargain.

Remember for now this is free so seeking counsel prior to your type of legal case you choose to pursue may be a good choice in order to help your trial. I obviously will only be counseling one side if any side. I can be contacted via PM or forum post though I prefer to talk in game as it is closer to a chat line than anything else. I am usually available 12 hours a day excluding weekends so I am flexible.

If anybody is interested in earthier starting a case or in danger of being prosecuted make sure to contact me.

P.S. Hay maybe it is successful I can get cutler to set up a makeshift office and a firm in the Astral Plane ROFL.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE:
Currently I see other attorneys showing up. I invite anybody to create there own firm to compete. I welcome it in fact. Because some people are worried about us creating a spoiled verdict by working together to get a guilty verdict for our most liked character. I do not deny the possibility of this happening although I do try to curb this completely though some will always slip past my eyes without my knowing. I will bring to your attention below the current other choices if you feel threatened by the possibilities may happen. I also will always post who is representing who just for your convince.

Representing:
Kamisha - N/A
Phantasm - N/A
Apophys - N/A
Orlando Gardiner(Temp. Inactive) - N/A

Other options other than my own associates (responsible for there own postings)

Grido - defense (independent)
©Anderson & Anderson® (smartalekrj) - Multipurpose (Firm)

Disclaimer: I am not associated with any of the members of the following firms or independents listed as other options. I am not responsible for there actions thoughts or opinions. I also am not completely sure of there orientation thus it is simply better if you go to them for all complainants comments and questions I am not at liberty to make any comments to represent them. Any information incorrect on the third party is not my responsibility.

On the lawyers in my firm some information will be delayed as I may not heat about representation until later in time. Please ask my lawyers about who they are representing if anybody prior to telling them anything about your case.

Edited March 26, 201016 yr by Kamisha

i am more then willing to also be a ....lawyer.....*insert evil laugh here*

so our firm now consists of two people.

Well if you think there is going to be a high demand for lawyers in the future, I could help you setup a law office in the new astral GG town (coming soon).

[img]http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/public/style_emoticons//cool.gif[/img]

Cheers,

Cutler

[quote][color="#cccccc"][2009-05-14 00:53:50 - Alpha 8][/color]
[b]The Judge[/b]
I am inagurating a COURT. At first it will be run by me, Muratus del Mur, as one judge to decide and take action. As this court will evolve and i will understand more of what judging type the realm needs it will be passed on to others to manage or will be adapted to fit the realm needs. My first rules for this court are these:


1) Trials can be initiated only by people directly involved in the situation that are suitable to suffer the decision of the trial.
2) Both sides will be heared both in private sessions and public ones the same number of times. Contacting me outside the decided session times is not allowed.
3) Each trial should have in its start a very clear concept of what it is disputed or demanded and what the requests of each side are.
4) Secret trials are not an option for now but could be an option if the discussed matters are of secret nature. I will be the one to decide that.
5) I can deny the start of a trial if i consider that there might by other ways to solve the issue
6) Trials involving groups of people should have same number of participants on both sides. In the situation as a single person accuses a group of people such as a organization, that person will have to get on its side more witnesses or people supporting his cause. This obviously gives more power to groups of people over single individuals because the punishments affecting groups are more important.
7) Proof and arguments should be given only when asked, any proof comming outside the time when its asked will be ignored.
8) The decisions of the trials are permanent and effective immediatly, both side must agree in the beginning of the trial that they will obey any decision resulting from the trial regardless how unfair they will consider it at the end.
9) Refusing to obey trial decisions will result in severe punishments

What types of things can be brought to trial?
From personal argues between players to more important situations. Creature theft, abuse, rule breaking, anything. Only important issues will be allowed to get to trial because my time is limited. At each trial i can select a group of people to vote, the selection will be as neutral as i can and i will not listen to your suggestions for the jury. I will try to select each time different people so that there wont be a "jury" profession.

I am making this to bring order not to scare or punish any of you, hopefuly this will turn into a flexible moderation system and not into an inquisition. My words here and now should remain as a guidence of what this was ment to be for later times when power will be tempting for the future judges. Where is power there is corruption.[/quote]

That is what court will mean in MD, so before making plans and groups, better take a look at what it is in the announcements.

[quote name='Akasha' date='26 February 2010 - 01:25 AM' timestamp='1267165540' post='55264']
That is what court will mean in MD, so before making plans and groups, better take a look at what it is in the announcements.
[/quote]
First, I see nothing in any of those rules that precludes legal representation. In fact, many of them require organization, planning, diplomacy, concise communication, and efficient timing - all things offered by lawyers and their law offices. In my opinion, most players would greatly benefit from receiving legal counsel. Many understand well their personal strengths and weaknesses and may not feel competent or confident enough to represent themselves in a trial wherein eloquent and effective speech, or the ways in which evidence is portrayed, may sway the verdict.

Second, with all of the recent talk of stifled roleplay and player involvement, I would think that those in positions of authority and power would do well to foster an atmosphere of freedom and creativity. I understand that things need to remain civil, orderly, and manageable and I'm also quick to remind others that this game belongs to yourself and Mur. Players should be involved in creative ways without being greedy, selfish, and disrespectful to the desires of this game's creaator. However, too many times I see harmless ideas silenced for reasons that I am unaware other than some personal grudge or a grappling to maintain control.

I believe he was referring to the problem considering private counsel which I do understand. that is why in law we would be councilperson prior to people standing trial. We would act as a reference in order to find past trails that find relevance in relation to theirs. Possible bargaining chips they could use to get a lighter sentance. I could make some comments considering this granos vs. Jacoand trial but I refuse to untill the trial is over because if eathier one of them seeks representation I have to keep what they tell me under raps and being a lawyer I would represent either as I should have no final ideal matter set in my head.

For those who want a trial they could come to me and I could say you don't or do have the evidence to win this. Not only would this yield possible unexpected results in trials it could also thin out some of the small disputes in the legal system before submitted as they could be solved outside of court and some may not have the evidence required.

Since I can not comment at the case at hand I can not give examples so I understand at the current time my argument is weak however after the case I can use examples from what could have happened to change the final outcome or what I did do depending on development.

Do I expect this to take off. Well as cases come up it seems more and more lawyers are needed so my legal experience says yes.

aye indeed. As many know in real life taking someone to court without a good backing could have horrible reprimands upon them. People are counter sued all the time for taking others to court. It's considered slander to accuse someone falsely of doing a wrong, and can end up getting the punishment they wished upon the defendant upon themselves.

A group that can advise other people its fine, but each one should have same access to the court with or without lawyer. In this regard, the lawyer group or whatever they will be called should state to each client that he can contact the court with or without them so that people wont start to think that if lawyer says no they have no chance. Otherwise, there will be a level of authority transfered to the lawyers and they will create a group of influence instead of a group of advisors.

I also like to hear out the accused and accuser in person because that tells much more than hearing out a formal presentation done by a lawyer. Or do you want me to judge the laywer with the facts of the accused? Lawyers should provide council not take the place of the accused or accuser during the trial.

Here is MD not RL, i do not want "criminals" to get away with it because they had a good lawyer, but i also dont want innocent people to get convicted because they are unable to speak out their situation.

I think i made myself clear enough, if not please ask questions.

Topic moved to MD Court forums.

what no OJ goes free?

Seriously though I understand what you mean by that. I think that a proper lawyer would be used for helping set up the case more then representing it. Some people are flat out not good at making a case, or debating. That's where the advice of a lawyer would come in. They would help set up sort of a format for the defendant/prosecutor to go by in order to help get their point across better. Do I think that a guilty person could go free if portrayed in an eloquent enough format? Hard to say, but I think it would give a great RP value to the whole thing.

Right now with Mur being the only Judge, of course we can't have trials all the time due to his busy schedule. Once Kings/Queens or appointed people are given the ability to make a judgment, then perhaps even pass the trial for the execution of the penalty for those found guilty, it would be an interesting thing to see more of these happen. Slander is a thing that happens in this game more often then about any other injustice. Thing such as Public Logs, Chat Screens, and so on could be put on trial. I think it would not only give the Kings/Queens an active part in their land, it would also be a great source of RP.

By obvious case and point I agree with the terms of judgment and in fact have said we can only counsel. We can suggest what they may want to bring up and maybe even demonstrate a way to talk such as replacing words with code words as people like to call them such as progress for development and modernization for inevitable. We can say what they need in order to prove a case though we cant necessarily say it is impossible as we have to leave the option open.

Earthier way though we have been given the go ahead so lets work out a name. We will take suggestions tally some votes and come to a firm name.

I start with the obvious one.....

KP Law Firm

I predicted something like this would emerge. As you can see, I have already volunteered to be a defense attorney last month.

http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/6377-creative-punishment/page__view__findpost__p__51862

Strange how I got negative rep for it.


I guess I'll be in this law firm.

considering your negative criticism upon most topics, and your overall distaste for being neutral, we would like to see what sort of credentials you have. It is simple to say you want to be a lawyer, it is another to be capable of being one.

The reason you often get negative reputation for your posts is because they lack a descriptive nature, and often times near sited. Judging by forum ability alone I would say no, but always willing to be an open ear, state why you think you would make a good lawyer in this firm.

I suggest from now on discussing something of this nature in a more private way, to keep from posts like this from happening.

I take pride in being brief and contest your assertion that my posts are near-sighted.

My evident lack of neutrality is because I don't see a point in posting where I have no opinion, unless it is some competition.


My credentials?
I studied several Supreme Court cases in a Civics course. I watched TV shows and several movies based on real courtroom dramas (I learned most here). Finally, I was the defense attorney in a classroom court proceeding and won the case (edit: no, the conclusion was not predetermined).


I agree that further applications should be limited. (Sorry for jumping the gun and just assuming I could enter without applying, as you did.)

Edited February 27, 201016 yr by apophys

I would be a Defense Attorney, but not part of your firm, i just wished to state my intent. And also to emphasise that there should not just be a single firm that controls all the Lawyers.

I can also be hired as a consultant, in that role, i would remain anonomous, and provide tips and ideas pertaining to the case, to aid in it. This differs from a Defense Attorney as that would involve me publicly speaking on your behalf.

Fees are decided on a case by case basis.

[quote name='Grido' date='26 February 2010 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1267236904' post='55375']
I would be a Defense Attorney, but not part of your firm, i just wished to state my intent. And also to emphasise that there should not just be a single firm that controls all the Lawyers.

I can also be hired as a consultant, in that role, i would remain anonomous, and provide tips and ideas pertaining to the case, to aid in it. This differs from a Defense Attorney as that would involve me publicly speaking on your behalf.

Fees are decided on a case by case basis.
[/quote]

I completely understand your intent. The ideal is that yes we need more than one firm or individuals. There must be more than one central power or else there could be corruption. Being consultants we could use bad advice. Though I try to make it as fair as possible I cant grantee that for example I can not speak to another person in the firm representing the opposing party. If the 2nd party has a problem with us representing the first party they should have a choice of another 3rd party then ourselves.

Oh yes and apophys you are accepted if you have truly done what you say you have. I would have been the judge in your trial if we went to the same school.

I am willing to be a lawyer to, but since I am NOT that flexible I let it up to you to decide if I would fit or not.

What are your credentials, Orlando? You need to convince the firm to accept you.

Consider this a first test of skill. If you can't convince us, how are you going to convince a jury?

[quote name='Orlando Gardiner' date='27 February 2010 - 02:23 AM' timestamp='1267259008' post='55388']
I am willing to be a lawyer to, but since I am NOT that flexible I let it up to you to decide if I would fit or not.
[/quote]

Flexibility shouldn't be an issue as we have others that can fill in in your absence as long as you of course privately fill in the blanks of what you have already talked about. Though make sure you are only talking to a lawyer that is not defending the other side. Though this firm works together if we are hired by both sides it is paramount that our credibility is not damaged in such a way.

However I do require some experience for people that are signing up. I cant accept everybody into the firm or else MD would just be a mashup of a single firm.

In actual court, a single firm cannot represent the interests of both parties, for the same reasons, it would be sensible for the same here.

Point clear, and indeed I expect no one to 'hire, me without knowing of my credibility.

I am most certain neutral, I cna shut down all personal feelings about a case, for what must be one of the main skills of a lawyer. I know the rules of md and know how to follow them(never broke one either, and I see that as a requested personal part)


All I will never do is accept cases of good friends, that would only mix up the conclussions around for what people think about it.

Well, I can tell all sorts of thinks about myself, but I guess that taking a trail shows more about what I actually can, because I could tell everything that you wish to hear, but if I actually posses those skills will remain unknown.

I will follow cases from now, and if one of the lawyers likes I would like to help with some of the cases to learn, and to show that I posses the skills for a lawyer.

[quote name='Orlando Gardiner' date='28 February 2010 - 05:32 AM' timestamp='1267360337' post='55474']
Point clear, and indeed I expect no one to 'hire, me without knowing of my credibility.

I am most certain neutral, I cna shut down all personal feelings about a case, for what must be one of the main skills of a lawyer. I know the rules of md and know how to follow them(never broke one either, and I see that as a requested personal part)


All I will never do is accept cases of good friends, that would only mix up the conclussions around for what people think about it.

Well, I can tell all sorts of thinks about myself, but I guess that taking a trail shows more about what I actually can, because I could tell everything that you wish to hear, but if I actually posses those skills will remain unknown.

I will follow cases from now, and if one of the lawyers likes I would like to help with some of the cases to learn, and to show that I posses the skills for a lawyer.
[/quote]


"Discussion is not about 'winning, but about sharing toughts and learn what other people think about it, or to get a compromise between two parties." - Orlando Gardiner

An interesting viewpoint for a lawyer.

[quote name='Grido' date='27 February 2010 - 09:39 PM' timestamp='1267328340' post='55447']
In actual court, a single firm cannot represent the interests of both parties, for the same reasons, it would be sensible for the same here.
[/quote]

I understand that is the case though actual firms can only work as a team in my regulations when a case is taken and more than one person is approached with each side they actually are working then as two completely independent councilperson. They cant speak or consult each other until the verdict is approached and posted. Now lets say they where working together in order to fix the final verdict in favor of one person. This I cant have and I understand that now that you bring that up it has occurred to me thanks by the way. This reflects badly on me as currently being the spokes person as it seems now at least. I am required to defend that. This is why I am going to apply a new rule to the what ever you want to call it for now until we get a name. In the case that this happens I will first deal with it as a internal affair basically we reach a verdict within the (what ever it is) even I can be convicted with the villainy. We have three now so this works. The neutral councilor acts as the judge and the proceedings go similar to murs. In such a case that somebody is convicted or both are then the name or names will be posted publicly and to what case. The losing side at least I think the losing side can then sue that person for repertions for there loses. I will not be defending these people and if I am found of such I request not to be defended. Its just that so many people want to take part I want people to have an equal right to a lawyer no matter what the crime.
I will always post who we are representing so people if they feel turned off by such can contact a different party in this case of what I know of that is only Grido.


[quote name='Jester' date='28 February 2010 - 09:45 AM' timestamp='1267371945' post='55486']
"Discussion is not about 'winning, but about sharing toughts and learn what other people think about it, or to get a compromise between two parties." - Orlando Gardiner

An interesting viewpoint for a lawyer.
[/quote]

Saw it my self and I find it somewhat disturbing. I make neutral thoughts only in the case that im not representing anybody at least at the moment. To find a compromise I agree with but in court it is not compromise it is finding who is guilty. The only compromise is the sentence. Since you are half way there I do have to give you credit. You enter but as a consultant not a lawyer until you can show me you have straitened that kink out. You cant take cases but in the case that the evidence is against someone one of our lawyers can come to you if they are stuck to find a way to supply information to maybe reduce the sentence.

You can choose to take or leave it I hope you understand.