Book of Criminal Justice

Section 1Preface#

The Book of Criminal Justice is the primary collection of Foundation legislation and legal procedure to which all SCPF personnel are bound. It aims to centralize this information in a single, comprehensible handbook, thereby facilitating its access and use. Offences are divided into two categories on the basis of their nature and severity: the Code of Public Security (Section 2), overseen jointly by the Ethics Committee (EC) and the Committee of Special Investigations (CSI), and the Code of Internal Security (Section 3), overseen directly by the Committee of Special Investigations. In addition to the contents of the Book of Criminal Justice, Foundation personnel must observe the Code of Ethics, which is enforced and maintained by the Ethics Committee.

Section 2Code of Public Security#

The Code of Public Security is a collection of criminal offences wherein enforcement jurisdiction is split between the Ethics Committee (EC) and the Committee of Special Investigations (CSI), depending on the nature and severity of the offence. Each of the following codes has conditions that may be applied to determine who should investigate a given incident as established under Section 2.B.

ACodes#

CE Class-E sentence FS Foundation Suspension

BJurisdiction#

1. The enforcement of the Code of Public Security is divided between the jurisdiction of the Committee of Special Investigations (CSI) and the Ethics Committee (EC). By default, all incidents involving suspected violations that fall under Section 2.A are under the enforcement jurisdiction of EC.

2. However, an incident will fall under CSI's jurisdiction under any of the following conditions:

   1. When it is probable that the suspected violation(s) were perpetrated to threaten or undermine the welfare or security of the Foundation, which includes its leadership;
   2. When committed in an organized manner—where multiple suspects are suspected of having coordinated to execute the alleged crime—or when the damage is so severe that it warrants CSI intervention;
   3. When at least one of the suspected violations committed during the incident falls under Section 3.A;
   4. When at least one of the suspected violations involves sensitive materials, as defined in Section I.A. of the Central Organization and Guidance of Sensitive Materials (COGSM); or
   5. When its consequences extend beyond on-site gameplay (e.g., departmental or Foundation security is at risk).

3. If CSI and EC fail to reach an agreement regarding the jurisdiction of a given case, the Justice Committee will be granted all available evidence to determine which agency should have jurisdiction.

Section 3Code of Internal Security#

The Code of Internal Security is a collection of criminal offences that the Committee of Special Investigations (CSI) holds enforcement jurisdiction over, with very few exceptions. These offences are typically of a very serious nature and include (but are not limited to) threats to the security and/or welfare of the Foundation, threats to the safety of the community and its members, as well as deception and/or abuse of power to the effect of damaging Foundation property and interfering with official processes.

ACodes#

CE Class-E sentence FS Foundation Suspension

Section 4Foundation Punishments#

There currently stand four types of Foundation punishments that personnel may be assigned with (ranging from less to most severe): Class-E, Foundation Suspension, Foundation Blacklist, and Community Safety Threat. Depending on the severity of a punishment, your membership within the Foundation can be severely limited or indefinitely terminated in accordance with Foundation legislation.

ATypes of Foundation Punishments#

Section 5Criminal Sentencing#

One of the core elements of the Foundation’s Criminal Justice system is bringing fair justice to those who are convicted of crimes. The Criminal-Sentencing process serves as a critical aspect in this fundamental system.

ASentencing Procedure#

1. The Criminal Sentencing Committee (the Sentencing Body) is responsible for approving or denying any and all requests to criminally sentence an individual by any enforcement agency (CSI or EC), except Emergency Class-E’s and Community Safety Threats (see Section 5.C).
   1. The Sentencing Body may refuse to issue a criminal sentence in any of the following cases:
      1. They believe the evidence to be insufficient in nature, or the evidence threshold has not been met:
         1. The evidence gathered MUST prove that, more likely than not, there was illegal conduct, and;
         2. The evidence gathered MUST prove that, more likely than not, the individual accused is responsible for the illegal conduct, or
         3. The evidence gathered MUST be sufficient to allow the Sentencing Body to reach a decision, one way or another.
      2. When evidence of intent, unless not needed as indicated in the offence’s definition, fails to be sufficiently provided or does not otherwise satisfy established standards;
      3. They believe the investigation to have been pursued inadequately or maliciously (in which case an appropriate investigative agency will be notified);
      4. They believe the accused to be innocent; or
      5. Any other reasonable motive, as established by precedent or logical deliberation.
   2. If denied, the investigation may be restarted at the behest of the Sentencing Body or be cancelled in its entirety. Should the enforcement agency disagree with the ruling of the Sentencing Body, they may contact the O5-Council for review.
   3. The Sentencing Body may overrule the minimum duration of a charge under a unique circumstance with approval from the O5-Council, in which case the aforementioned minimum should be reviewed and modified in accordance with the new precedent.
   4. Should the Sentencing Body approve a Foundation Blacklist request, this request MUST then be forwarded to the O5-Council for review in accordance with regulations established below.

BRequesting & Approving a Criminal Sentence#

1. NOTICES:

   1. Before requesting the suspension (CE or FBL) of an individual, it is REQUIRED that they have not been a victim of any cases outlined in Section 5.D – Illegal Prosecutions.

   2. Requesting the suspension (CE, FS or FBL) of an individual REQUIRES that the individual being prosecuted has allegedly committed at least one criminal offence outlined in Section 2 – Code of Public Security or Section 3 – Code of Internal Security, or has broken some Foundation law. Individuals may NOT be suspended or prosecuted for any criminal offence that is not outlined in the Book of Criminal Justice or not found to be breaking any sort of Foundation law.

   3. If, after the request of a sentence, the alleged offender’s rights are violated, the request is to be put on indefinite hold in accordance with any of the relevant cases outlined in Section 5.E – Illegal Convictions, pending review from the Justice Committee or the O5-Council.

   4. ALL requests are required to have non-conflicting, appropriate, and legal evidence that supports the criminal conviction of an individual(s) (this MUST be shown in the card of the request unless classified as “RANGAITHE” or above).

   5. After the request has been properly made and forwarded, the individual(s) being charged MUST be informed of it and MUST be reasonably given the opportunity to provide a defence. This need not be done immediately, but voting may not commence until the individual(s) being charged have been informed of it and have been given a reasonable opportunity to provide a defence. ALL evidence used in an attempt to convict them must be made known to the offender, whether classified or not (see clause ‘IMPORTANT’ below). Lastly, they MUST be made clearly aware of their rights to appeal against a conviction and their right to appeal against a sentence.

   6. Any member of a voting body who is the victim of or otherwise personally interested in a case MUST recuse themselves from voting on it (see Section 7.B). Recusals are to be recorded alongside the vote tally.

   7. ALL requests will have ONE WEEK to be reviewed and voted on by the Criminal Sentencing Committee. In the event that the request has not been handled by the deadline, the deadline may be reasonably extended for up to 1 week or more (if approved by the O5-Council). If still not complete by the new deadline, it will be forwarded to the O5-Council. Additionally, the final votes for each party MUST be safely recorded (number of “for” and “against” votes) along with the names of those involved in the party’s voting process.

2. PROCESS:

   1. TO REQUEST a criminal sentence for an individual, the request MUST be set up on the official platform used to record requests containing the following elements:

      1. Date of the request
      2. Name(s) of the prosecutor(s) & Name of the offender(s)
      3. Charges (the criminal offences committed) with their designated number and the durations for each charge.
      4. Brief overview of the case
      5. Appropriate evidence (unless restricted) (refer to 1.d. above)
      6. Any witnesses
      7. Duration of the suspension/criminal sentence

   2. THE DURATION of the criminal sentence is decided by the Sentencing Body with the approval of two-thirds of the votes cast. Under no circumstance may the duration of a sentence be disproportionate or inappropriate with respect to: the gravity of the offence(s) committed; the offender’s criminal history; the circumstances of the case (e.g., a first-time offender under “105 | Murder” can receive around a 3-day CE duration, but not 1 month; a second-time offender for the same offence can receive around a 2-week duration, but not yet 1 month), and the precedent(s) held for relevant or similar cases in the past (two persons who committed the same crime under the same circumstances should not be punished very differently).

      1. The duration should generally increase for repeat offenders (though not always where an offence is minor), without being unnecessarily excessive or unreasonable (e.g., for a repeat offender of ONLY “105 | Murder”, an acceptable sequence could be: 3 days, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 18 months, FBL).
      2. The duration must NOT go below the imposed minimum(s) (“Min. Duration”) of the charge(s) as stated in this book. The total duration equals the sum of the durations decided for each charge, subject to the concurrence rule in Section 7.4.A.: minimums are not accumulated for a single act satisfying multiple codes.
      3. The duration assigned for a charge MUST be expressed in whole days (e.g., 1, 2, 3 days).
      4. The MAXIMUM allowable duration is 1 YEAR AND 6 MONTHS (18 months) for a CE sentence and SIX MONTHS for a Foundation Suspension (see Section 4.A.2), except where a person is ONLY charged with a code violation that carries its own imposed “Max. Duration”.
      5. Where the offender seriously breaks Foundation legislation other than this book, the duration shall be decided by the Sentencing Body unless that legislation specifies one.
      6. The prosecuting enforcement agency retains permission to input a recommended sentence.

   3. THE DEFENCE of the alleged offender(s) will be heard (if they choose to present one) prior to the official voting process. Those who decide to defend themselves are presumed to be pleading ‘not guilty’ and will have THREE DAYS from the date they are informed of their CE/FS/FBL request to convey to the Sentencing Body why they are not guilty of their charges. This window may not be abused to delay proceedings: where the Sentencing Body unanimously finds the criminal actions to be objectively clear, it may proceed to a vote once the accused has been given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

      1. GUILTY PLEAS: the accused may instead plead guilty to some or all charges, waiving the remainder of the defence window for those charges. The Sentencing Body may weigh a guilty plea, along with any cooperation, as a mitigating circumstance when fixing the duration — never below the applicable minimums (see Section 7.D.).

   4. THE CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMITTEE will then be required to vote on the request to either approve or deny. There must be at least 5 members participating in this party.

   5. AFTER THE APPROVAL by the Criminal Sentencing Committee, the convicted offender(s) will be officially sentenced, and the prosecutor must then comply with the “Ethical Disciplinary Actions & Negligence” legislation and inform them of their sentence. They must also be informed of their rights to appeal under either two classifications: an ‘appeal against a conviction’ and ‘appeal against a sentence’ (see Section 6 – Appeals System).

3. O5-COUNCIL JURISDICTIONS:

   1. Through a majority vote, the O5-Council retains the ability to VETO a criminal sentence with just reasoning.
   2. Through a majority vote, the O5-Council retains the ability to AUTOMATICALLY PASS a criminal sentence with just reasoning.
   3. Through a majority vote, the O5-Council retains the ability to put a criminal sentence ON-HOLD for just reasoning.
   4. Through a majority vote, the O5-Council retains the permission to ALTER the status or conditions of a criminal sentence for just reasoning.

CCommunity Safety Threat Sentences#

1. NOTICES:

   1. ALL granted Community Safety Threat (“CST”) statuses MUST contain appropriate and valid reasoning and evidence pertaining to the case. Any CST statuses with no proper reasoning and evidence will be considered “ILLEGAL” and immediately revoked.

   2. ONLY individuals can be assigned a CST status should they meet the conditions as shown above (Section 4.A.4. “COMMUNITY SAFETY THREAT”).

   3. The O5-Council will be the body responsible (with MAKSUR authorization by the O5-Head or The Administrator) for approving and denying CST requests, this is unless The Administrator approves and assigns it. For a request to pass, there must be a majority of approval for the case. For a request to be denied, there must be a majority of approval against the case.

2. PROCESS:

   1. TO REQUEST a CST sentence for an individual(s), the request MUST be set up in the O5-Council’s voting-dedicated platform containing the following elements:

      1. Date of the request
      2. Name(s) of the prosecutor(s) & Name of the offender(s)
      3. Detailed description of the criminal offences
      4. Brief overview of the case
      5. Appropriate evidence

   2. THE DURATION of the criminal sentence is permanent unless appealed by the O5-Head or The Administrator (see Section 6 – Appeals System).

   3. THE APPROVAL (see Section 4.A.4.d).

   4. AFTER THE APPROVAL of the CST sentence, it shall be made aware to ALL personnel and announced via the main Foundation communications. The individual(s) will have their membership in the group TERMINATED and barred from participating in any Foundation-related activity and sites.

DIllegal Prosecutions#

Foundation personnel who are victims of the following situations that are listed below in a criminal case can NOT be prosecuted and convicted of any charge(s):

1. ENTRAPMENT:

   1. DEFINITION: “Entrapment” is defined as a practice where a law enforcement or administrative body INDUCES or DECEIVES a person (or more) into infringing Foundation law as a result, which the person(s) would have otherwise been most unlikely to commit. This is especially in cases where entrapment is influenced by malicious purposes (see below “2. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION”).

      1. CASES: The following cases are examples of when Entrapment can protect an individual.

         CASE EX.1: Karen was charged with trespassing into an unauthorized area on-site by a law enforcement body; however, she was told that she was allowed to enter it by permission from law enforcement. So, she entered it and was then immediately detained and charged for ‘trespassing’.

         CASE EX.2: Steve received outdated intelligence documents and asked an intelligence agent if he was allowed to distribute them because it was outdated, the agent permitted him, and Steve distributed them. As a result, Steve was charged with ‘Unauthorized Transmission of Classified Information’.

   2. CONSEQUENCES: The case is to be dismissed, resulting in no conviction for the alleged offenders, and the prosecutor(s) may be charged with “Malicious Prosecution”.

2. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION:

   1. DEFINITION: “Malicious Prosecution” is the act of maliciously prosecuting someone by bringing forward a case without probable and truthful cause (e.g., with integrity; no entrapment; no trickery), such as for:

      1. Defaming them or destroying their career, especially as revenge towards personnel who take justified action(s) against administrative personnel for their wrongdoings (see “Ethical Disciplinary Actions & Negligence” for further information);

      2. Obtaining or stealing their job or position;

      3. Doing so for one’s unjust benefit or interests, or

      4. CASES: The following cases are examples when Malicious Prosecution can protect an individual:

         CASE EX.1: Rose tricks Joe into violating Foundation legislation and subsequently prosecutes him in an attempt to ruin his career.

         CASE EX.2: Sally likes Johnny’s job, so she prosecutes him with trivial justification to steal it.

         CASE EX.3: Ron approves the forwarding of a request for prosecution of an individual despite it clearly not adhering to legal standards.

   2. CONSEQUENCES: The case is to be dropped, and the prosecutor(s) are to be charged with “Malicious Prosecution”. Any titles or possessions that the victim has lost as a result will be returned to them.

3. DOUBLE JEOPARDY:

   1. DEFINITION: “Double Jeopardy” is the act of prosecuting someone twice for the same crime that they’ve committed but were acquitted of.

      1. CASES: The following cases are examples of when Double Jeopardy can protect an individual.

         CASE EX.1: Karen was prosecuted for the attempted manslaughter of an O5-Councilor, but the evidence was insufficient, and she was acquitted of the charges. However, she was later prosecuted for the same charge.

   2. CONSEQUENCES: The case is to be dismissed.

4. PROSECUTION OF NON-EXISTING OFFENSE:

   1. DEFINITION: “Prosecution of Non-Existing Offense” is the act of prosecuting someone for committing an act that does NOT classify as a “criminal offense” outlined in the Code of Internal Security, the Code of Public Security, or does not break any Foundation law.
      1. NOTICE: It is acceptable to prosecute someone for participating in an act that is not otherwise defined as a “criminal offense” in the Code of Public Security or Code of Internal Security with AUTHORIZATION from the O5-Council following their independent review.
   2. CONSEQUENCES: The case is to be dismissed unless a special case occurs (see NOTICE).

EIllegal Convictions#

Individuals who are illegally prosecuted (as outlined above in “Section 5.D – Illegal Prosecutions”), can NOT be criminally convicted. However, in the case where they are legally prosecuted but not treated fairly in a criminal case (as outlined below), then a complaint can be made to the Justice Committee for diligent review.

1. VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS:
   1. DEFINITION: personnel who did not undergo the proper criminal sentencing process and/or failed to receive some legal right(s) in a criminal case.

Section 6Appeals System#

The Appeals System serves to allow individuals to fight against a potential wrongful or unfair sentence, or appeal for readmission into the Foundation, who regret their actions. This is an important part of our system to ensure that there was, and is, fair justice. The Justice Committee takes purview of the appeals process, which includes game bans and CE appeals, excluding FBLs, CSTs, and any other punishments issued by the O5-Council, O5-Head, or the Administrator.

AAppeal Process#

1. APPEAL AGAINST A CONVICTION (AaC):

   1. If the individual(s) believe they were wrongfully or unfairly convicted, they MUST have proper counter-evidence to prove their innocence.

2. APPEAL AGAINST A SENTENCE (AaS):

   1. If the individual(s) agrees with the conviction (i.e. admits to being guilty of the crime they are being charged with), BUT believes the punishment(s) they were issued are disproportionate to the crime(s), is unreasonable, or they otherwise believe they have served enough time, they MUST provide the context behind their sentence and justification upon which they are building their appeal.

3. PROCESS FOR SUSPENSION APPEALS:

   1. Appeals classified as “Appeal Against a Conviction” and “Appeal Against a Sentence” can be passed via the process as outlined below (does not include those who were CSTed). However, for any punishment that was assigned and/or approved by the O5-Council or by “MAKSUR” authorization, its appeal MUST go through either the O5-Council, the O5-Head, or The Administrator (whoever issued the punishment). ALL appeals that have passed MUST have a legally justified and reasonable basis.
   2. PROCESS:

      1. An appeal MUST FIRST be sent to the Justice Committee for diligent review and approval. These members may not be the same who participated in the sentencing process, and there must be at least 5 members participating in reviewing and voting on this appeal.

      2. Should the appeal be denied by the Justice Committee, the decision can then be challenged by forwarding them the SAME appeal to the O5-Council to determine if it may be overturned through diligent review.

      3. Should the convicted person fail to have their appeal accepted following the process above or by the O5-Council, the appeal has failed, and the suspension (and its conditions) will remain; a valid reason MUST be given to the individual. In addition, the person may attempt another (different) appeal ONE WEEK after the result.

      4. In the event that an “Appeal Against a Conviction” has been approved, then the relevant criminal sentence must immediately end and be cleared from the person’s record (by archiving and making clear of the appeal on the relevant documentation form).

      5. If an “Appeal Against a Sentence” has been approved, then the relevant criminal sentence must be reviewed, and the agreed changes are to be established by the sentencing party in collaboration with the appealing party.

      6. The O5-Council reserves the authority to OVERTURN any decisions made by the Justice Committee.

4. PROCESS FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY THREAT APPEALS:

   1. ALL CSTs can be appealed via the O5-Head or The Administrator with just reasoning. In the event that the CST was assigned by The Administrator, then it may ONLY be appealed by him.

BNo-Appeal Designations#

“No-Appeal” designations can be assigned to personnel to temporarily revoke an individual’s ability to send an “Appeal against a Sentence”.

1. AUTHORIZATIONS:
   1. The only individuals who are AUTHORIZED to grant a “No-Appeal” designation for justified reasoning are as follows:
      1. The O5-Head and The Administrator can assign this designation INDEFINITELY. This can ONLY be overturned by a majority Council vote.
      2. The O5-Council can assign this designation for ONE YEAR. This can ONLY be overturned by a majority Council vote or by The Administrator.
      3. The Criminal Sentencing Committee can assign this designation for up to SIX MONTHS through a majority vote and MUST be approved by the O5-Council. This can ONLY be overturned by a majority Council vote or by The Administrator.

Section 7General Provisions#

The provisions in this section apply across the entirety of the Book of Criminal Justice. They establish the treatment of attempted offenses and overlapping charges, time limits on prosecution, conflict-of-interest rules, guilty pleas, and the expungement of old convictions.

AAttempt, Concurrence & Limitations#

1. ATTEMPT: an attempt to commit any offence is punishable under the code defining that offence. The Sentencing Body may weigh the absence of completed harm as a mitigating circumstance when fixing the duration.
2. CONCURRENCE: where a single act satisfies the definitions of multiple codes, the more specific code governs, and minimum durations are NOT accumulated for that act. Separate acts remain separately chargeable.
3. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: no prosecution may be initiated more than SIX MONTHS after the discovery of an offence under the Code of Public Security, or more than TWO YEARS after the discovery of an offence under the Code of Internal Security.
   1. No limitation applies to “301 | Malicious Threat”, “303 | Sexual Misconduct”, “345 | Treason”, to conduct meeting the standards for a Community Safety Threat, or where the delay results from the offender’s own concealment of the offence.
   2. The limitation period is suspended for as long as the offender actively conceals the offence or evades investigation.

BRecusal & Conflicts of Interest#

1. No member of any voting or reviewing body (the Criminal Sentencing Committee, the Justice Committee, or the O5-Council) may participate in a vote or review concerning a case in which they are the victim, the prosecutor, or in which they hold any other personal interest. Such members MUST recuse themselves, and recusals are to be recorded alongside the vote tally (see Section 5.B.1.f.).
2. A decision reached in violation of this subsection constitutes a Violation of Due Process (see Section 5.E).

CGuilty Pleas#

1. An accused individual may plead guilty to some or all of the charges brought against them at any point before voting concludes, thereby waiving the remainder of their defence window for those charges (see Section 5.B.2.c.).
2. The Sentencing Body may weigh a guilty plea, along with any cooperation with the investigation, as a mitigating circumstance when fixing the duration of the sentence. The duration may NOT be reduced below the applicable minimum(s).
3. A guilty plea does not waive the right to an Appeal Against a Sentence. An Appeal Against a Conviction following a guilty plea requires evidence that the plea was made under duress, deception, or a violation of due process.

DArchiving#

1. A conviction whose served duration was FOURTEEN DAYS or fewer is archived after ONE YEAR without any further conviction.
2. When a conviction is archived, it ceases to count toward the offender’s criminal history for the purposes of sentence escalation (see Section 5.B.2.b.), and ceases to count toward accumulated served time under Section 4.A.3.1.c.
3. The O5-Council may exclude a specific conviction from archival with just reasoning.

Collaborators and Signatories#

Current Edition#

• FaIse_Chaos, O5-1
• Retrospektve, O5-3
• HozoneFive, O5-10
• Lmplicty, O5-11
• Zt4rkAt, O5-13
• Synteros, EC Chairman
• Water_Script, JC Chief Adjudicator
• RyderSJ_2016, CSI Chief Investigator
• Nokhronos (Chronosilius), CSC Foreman
• 90ninjas, JC Adjucicator

Previous Edition#

• Vursice, former O5-2
• Hesitermisters, former O5-7
• Chronosilius, former O5-8
• FocusLynx, former CSC Foreman
• 90ninjas, former O5-5
• MaxVindication, former DSI Director
• Tagap1234, former DSI Director

Revised by EC Chairman Synteros. Original composition of the Act by former O5-2, Vursice.