- Joined
- Jun 28, 2024
- Messages
- 63
Verdict 
In the case of Azalea Isles v. Krix (2024) CR 01
Charges:
1 count of murder
12 counts of robbery
On the count of Murder:
The court finds that the crime-watcher system is sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant killed another person and finds the defendant GUILTY.
On the twelve counts of robbery:
The crime-watcher system proves that the defendant performed the /rob command at least twelve times. It's therefore clear that the defendant attempted to commit 12 counts of robbery.
However, to find the defendant guilty of a crime, the prosecution does not only need to prove intent but also, that the facts satisfy the definition of the crime.
Section 1.5 of the Criminal Code Act defines robbery as:
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.
As the prosecution stipulated the crime-watcher system can generate a report of robbery to the police when a person runs '/rob' on a person with a 0 or negative balance resulting in no actual taking, stealing or coming into adverse possession of any money. Therefore the crime-watcher system is not enough to satisfy the burden.
The balance data of all possible victims as recorded on the 31st of May, is highly circumstantial as the alleged robberies occurred on the 19th of May. Furthermore, it also proves that several possible victims had a non-positive balance.
The court will not give weight to the argument on the probabilities as presented by the prosecution. It's the court's opinion this analysis lacked scientific rigour and a clear conclusion and therefore will not be considered.
For ten of the twelve counts of robbery, these were the only evidence presented. The courts did not find sufficient evidence to reasonably exclude the possibility that no money was transferred from the possible victims and therefore find the defendant NOT GUILTY for ten counts of robbery.
However, for two of the twelve counts of robbery, the prosecution produced a witness who testified that they were robbed twice by the defendant and showed logs in support thereof. Clearly showing that a total of $14 was taken from the victim to the defendant. The court has found no reasonable reason to find the logs or the testimony unreliable.
It's the opinion of the court that the logs and testimony are sufficient evidence to reasonably exclude the possibility that no money was transferred from the victim to the defendant and therefore the state has satisfied their burden for these two counts of robbery and subsequently the court finds the defendant GUILTY for two counts of robbery.
However, to find the defendant guilty of a crime, the prosecution does not only need to prove intent but also, that the facts satisfy the definition of the crime.
Section 1.5 of the Criminal Code Act defines robbery as:
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.
As the prosecution stipulated the crime-watcher system can generate a report of robbery to the police when a person runs '/rob' on a person with a 0 or negative balance resulting in no actual taking, stealing or coming into adverse possession of any money. Therefore the crime-watcher system is not enough to satisfy the burden.
The balance data of all possible victims as recorded on the 31st of May, is highly circumstantial as the alleged robberies occurred on the 19th of May. Furthermore, it also proves that several possible victims had a non-positive balance.
The court will not give weight to the argument on the probabilities as presented by the prosecution. It's the court's opinion this analysis lacked scientific rigour and a clear conclusion and therefore will not be considered.
For ten of the twelve counts of robbery, these were the only evidence presented. The courts did not find sufficient evidence to reasonably exclude the possibility that no money was transferred from the possible victims and therefore find the defendant NOT GUILTY for ten counts of robbery.
However, for two of the twelve counts of robbery, the prosecution produced a witness who testified that they were robbed twice by the defendant and showed logs in support thereof. Clearly showing that a total of $14 was taken from the victim to the defendant. The court has found no reasonable reason to find the logs or the testimony unreliable.
It's the opinion of the court that the logs and testimony are sufficient evidence to reasonably exclude the possibility that no money was transferred from the victim to the defendant and therefore the state has satisfied their burden for these two counts of robbery and subsequently the court finds the defendant GUILTY for two counts of robbery.
Sentencing:
Given the undisputed fact that the defendant did intend to rob multiple persons which they already killed prior. The court considers that a high punishment is necessary to deter the defendant from repeating their actions.
- The defendant will be sentenced to 60 minutes of jail time for count 1 of robbery.
- The defendant will be sentenced to 60 minutes of jail time for count 2 of robbery.
- The defendant will be sentenced to 5 minutes of jail time for count 1 of murder and a fine of $50.
Any pre-trial detention will count towards the time served.
This is my judgement, thank you for your time.
