SA Course: Chamber of Justice II

I may never come back, and I just want someone to know. This article contains text from a former Shadow Academy course. It is no longer in use, and is preserved here for historical purposes only and should not be used/referenced.

Chamber of Justice II (#57) was designed to help members understand the basics of the judicial system and procedures in the Dark Jedi Brotherhood. It predates the current Shadow Academy site, which launched in the summer of 2013. The course was retired in November 2016 by Justicar Jac Cotelin and Headmaster Farrin Xies alongside the old Dark Covenant..

Course Notes

1 - Introduction

The original Chamber of Justice course was created for the Shadow Academy as a method of introducing the general membership to the topics of law in the Brotherhood. The course offered a broad overview of all important topics related to the Chamber, and has become an invaluable resource. This course was added for those members who wish a more thorough, in-depth look at the Chamber's workings. It offers more detailed instruction on difficult topics from the original course, as well as introducing new advanced material.

This course will cover, in detail, the following topics:

• Sources and Types of Brotherhood Law
• Advanced Chamber Policies
• The Trial Process
• Important Precedents

Remember that all Chamber of Justice related material can be found via the DJBWiki, specifically from the CoJ Category page. In addition, I would recommend everyone taking this course keep the Dark Covenant page open and reference it whenever a specific Article or Section is named.

2 - Brotherhood Law

The Dark Jedi Brotherhood's system is a mixture of two main types of law, and the laws themselves are found in several sources. These all come together to form a cohesive, flexible system that can have a strong fist when necessary, yet is also fair - a crucial balance for our online environment.

The Brotherhood operates on a mixture of two major types of law, statutory law and common law. Statutory law is written law (as opposed to oral or customary law), often set in the form of a code. These laws are put in place by an authoritative group or executive. In terms of the Brotherhood, the Dark Covenant (and other sources outlined in the next section) serves as our codified law - it clearly outlines the laws of our group, as decided by the Dark Council. Common law is law developed through the decisions of courts, it is created and refined by judges. In common law, the decision in a current case depends on precedents set in decisions made previously, and the decision made in the current case will affect cases decided after it. In terms of the Brotherhood, the precedents set in past cases by the actions of the Justicar and the Chamber as a whole serve as laws and policies followed by the current Chamber. The mixture of these two types of law allows the Brotherhood to have a codified set of laws for members to read and abide by, while allowing the Chamber of Justice the flexibility to establish precedents stemming from the code which ensure the laws function as intended.

The laws of the Brotherhood originate from more than one source, which often confuses members yet is both necessary and a function of our heritage. The main source of law is the Dark Covenant, which outlines the structure and function of the Brotherhood, as well as the "rules" of the club (found in the Article VIII, Section 8.06 - Articles of Conduct). However, the Covenant is augmented by several other sources of law, which all have authority. The Rites of Combat govern the conduct for all gaming competitions within the Brotherhood. The IRC Guidelines set the standards to be followed by Brotherhood members when communicating via IRC. Judicial decrees are permitted as a source of law by the Dark Covenant (Article VIII, Section 8.06(a) ). While there is no formal list of Judicial decrees, they are most often found in the form of precedents set by past Chamber cases.

While not as complicated as any national Judicial system, the Brotherhood's system is far more complex than that of most internet clubs. While some members see this as a problem, the truth is that the complexity is the result of years of sub-standard systems which failed the membership. The most frequent result of past systems was a unitary judicial figure who unilaterally made all judicial decisions - a recipe for tyranny. The current system can be difficult to understand at first, but it is designed around the idea of preventing any one person from ruining the experience for the members.

3 - Advanced Chamber Policies

The Dark Covenant gives the Justicar the authority to create Chamber of Justice Policies and Procedures that are separate from and not in conflict with the Covenant itself. These Policies and Procedures operate with the authority of the Dark Covenant in regards to judicial issues. The policies were all covered in the introductory Chamber of Justice course, but several of the concepts are either of the utmost importance, or are often misunderstood even by graduates, and therefore are being covered again in more detail.

Cloning

The Dark Covenant, in Article VII, Section 8.06(i), states that no member shall have more than one persona in a single household without prior authorization by the Justicar. This may seem like a simple concept, but the Justicar spends the much of his time investigating and solving issues involving cloning. Each person is permitted to have one DB persona - typically that means one DB dossier per household. However in cases where multiple members of one household are members of the Brotherhood, they must inform the Justicar of this and obtain his permission. This is done to ensure members are not creating clones that could be used to cheat in competitions. The main idea is one DB persona per person, and all households with multiple DB members must obtain permission from the Justicar.

Statute of Limitations

The Statute of Limitations was added to the Dark Covenant, Article VIII, Section 8.03(o) by amendment. It states that all complaints must be brought to the Chamber of Justice within three months of the discovery of an underlying event, or else the complaint will be dismissed. This change was made to prevent members from attempting to start prosecutions for events which happened years in the past. This policy is commonly misunderstood, almost always for the same reason - the complaint must be brought within three months of the discovery of the underlying event. If a crime is committed today, but it is not discovered that the crime was committed until six months later - it can still be brought to the Chamber, because the three-month countdown starts on the date of discovery. This was put into place to prevent members from escaping prosecution by merely waiting for the three month period to end.

Ex Post Facto

The Dark Covenant, Article VIII, Section 8.02(d) offers all members of the Brotherhood protection from ex post facto prosecution. This means that members are protected from laws that retroactively change the legal consequences of acts committed. Basically, if an act is committed which is legal, but later made illegal by a new law, the member who committed the act cannot be prosecuted for it, because at the time it was not against the law. This policy is overlooked or misunderstood by many members, but it is a very important protection afforded to all of us.

Double Jeopardy

In Article VIII, Section 8.03(m) of the Dark Covenant, the Brotherhood has provided it's members protection from what is often termed "double jeopardy" (although this term does not appear in the Covenant text). This protection forbids a defendant from being tried a second time for the same specific crime which he has previously been prosecuted, unless the verdict was delivered through a miscarriage of the judicial process (which would be determined by the Appeals Panel). This policy is the most often misunderstood - many members think it means that no one can be tried for the same type of crime (for example, cheating) more than once. In reality it means that no member can be tried more than once for the same specific act (for example, cheating on fiction event A in GJW12), however they can be tried more than once for the same type of crime (for example, cheating in different events). Double jeopardy is not a "get away with a crime free card", it prevents an overzealous Chamber from prosecuting the same trial over and over until they get the verdict they wish.

Admissibility

The Chamber's policy on what is admissible into proceedings is very simple, yet very important for all members to understand. Evidence from IRC or other chat programs, including personal messages and private channels, is admissible in trial, as are all emails, message board posts, or any other method of communication which can be accurately logged. Relevant evidence showing statements directly from the accused or another party will be permitted to prove the truth of the matters stated in the logs. Basically, anything said by a Brotherhood member via any method of communication is admissible in Chamber proceedings (with the exception of Hearsay testimony) . In the past, members had tried to hide behind the idea of "private" channels, or the fact something was said via "private message". However, the Chamber widened the admissibility rules to rid the system of any loopholes - all members are responsible for everything they say, regardless of the method they choose to say it.

4 - The Trial Process

The introductory course briefly mentions the trial process and directs everyone to the Covenant, and the Dark Covenant details the entire process of adjudication in Article VIII, Section 8.03. While this description hits all the major points, it misses some minor (yet important ones), and doesn't give a good sense of how the trial process actually occurs. Therefore this section will be a more narrative account of a trial, which hopefully make it easier for everyone to understand the process.

All trials begin with a complaint which is brought to the Justicar - mostly these come from members, but occasionally the Justicar investigates something he finds himself. From here the Justicar begins his investigation, collecting all the evidence possible and putting together a clear picture of the event. After the investigation has concluded, the Justicar will determine whether mediation is appropriate - for most issues, which are minor, mediation will be successful, however some issues are serious enough to warrant a trial without mediation. After the Justicar has determined that the case has merit, he informs the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, and both Hands of Justice. The Justicar and the Right Hand of Justice then put together the charge sheet, and the Justicar delivers the notification of charges to the defendant.

The notification informs the defendant of the charges against him, and asks him to plea either guilty or not guilty within four days. If there is no response within four days, an automatic plea of not guilty is entered, and the case moves to a Trial by Justicar. If the defendant pleads guilty, then the Justicar convenes with the Hands of Justice to determine appropriate sentence for the charges. Most frequently however, the defendant will plea not guilty. For trials in which the proposed penalty is a one-grade Equite or Elder demotion, a two-grade Journeyman demotion, or less, the case is automatically decided by a Trial by Justicar, due to the minor status of the case. In a Trial by Justicar, the Justicar reviews the evidence and discusses the situation with the Hands of Justice to get their perspectives. He may also give additional questions to the defendant to help him reach his conclusion. Once the Justicar has made up his mind, he announces the outcome of the case, along with any sentence he has decided upon. For all other cases with more serious potential penalties, the defendant may choose either Trial by Justicar or Trial by Jury. The most common choice is Trial by Jury.

The jury trial process begins with the jury selection. First a member of the Dark Council is chosen at random to serve as their one representative on the jury. The Justicar then picks twenty random Elders and Equites, often from the medal and promotion reports, or recently posted reports, to ensure they are active members. Then a random number generator is used to choose seven members (five for the jury plus two alternates) from the list. After the members are chosen, the Justicar contacts each member individually to ensure they wish to participate, and do not have any sort of prior relationship with the defendant. Once this process is complete, jury selection is over, and the argument phase can begin.

The argument phase has three parts - first the submission of the prosecutions initial arguments, then the defense submits it's arguments (which also contain a response to the prosecution's initial arguments), and finally the prosecution gets to submit a rebuttal to the defense arguments. These are all submitted directly to the Justicar, who reads them to ensure proper form has been followed, then puts all three arguments into one folder and sends them to the jury along with jury instructions. The jury then reads the arguments and begin their deliberations via email (the Justicar is always on the thread to monitor and answer any procedural questions). The jury must come to a unanimous decision on guilt or innocence - if they cannot do so, another jury is convened in the same manner as the first. An important note on jury decision making - the Dark Covenant states that their decision on guilt or innocence must be, "supported by a preponderance of the evidence". This is important for to know - it means "whether an issue of fact is more probable than not probable". This burden of proof is the most appropriate for our online environment, as it allows the jury to use common sense combined with the evidence and arguments given to determine guilt.

Once the jury reaches a unanimous decision, the Justicar announces the result to the defendant. If they have been found innocent, then the process is over and they are free to go. If they are found guilty, then the Justicar will determine what the appropriate sentence is, and apply it. In rare cases where expulsion is decided to be the appropriate measure, a second jury must be chosen to review the validity of the choice to expel. If the expulsion jury approves by at least a 4/6 vote, the sentence stands and the member is permanently expelled. After the sentence has been delivered, the proceedings have ended. The Justicar will put together the case summary, and write his Justicar's Opinion, and post them both in report form for the Brotherhood to see. Then all the case information is added to the confidential Chamber Case Archive, which is only available for Dark Council members. Finally, the Justicar writes up a full case description and posts it on the DJBWiki.

One last note: the Dark Covenant offers the Justicar the ability to end all proceedings in Article VIII, Section 8.03(p) when it states, "The Justicar, with approval from the Grand Master, may summarily dismiss charges regardless of the stage in the proceedings." This is a seldom-used ability, but is important if exculpatory evidence is brought to the Justicar during any part of the trial.

That sums up the typical trial process - the entire process can take anywhere from two weeks (for a Trial by Justicar), to one month (for a Jury trial with expulsion). Trials are a rarity for the Chamber of Justice, typically complaints are either found to have no merit, or are mediated without need for a trial. However when necessary, the process has been tested and found to work very well.

5 - Important Precedents

As mentioned previously, the Brotherhood's judicial system is based partially on common law, which is law developed through the decisions of courts, based on the precedents set in past cases. For a full understanding of DB law, it is important to be able to identify and understand the precedents that have been set by our system. While there is something unique in nearly every case, not all cases establish (or overturn) precedents, so below we will list the cases that do and explain the precedent set.

Case 001 DB vs. Blade

The first case tried by the Chamber of Justice, it established several important procedural precedents. First was the role of prosecutor for the Right Hand of Justice, which was set in a de-facto manner by Jac Cotelin as RHoJ during this case. The second was the official "Notification of Charges", which was established in this case and whose form is still followed today. This case also saw the first-ever use of a jury in the Brotherhood, and many of the methods used were later written into the Covenant. Finally the use of Chamber Communiques to communicate the results of cases, and the Letter of Reprimand as a punishment, were both established in this case. In summary:

• Use of RHoJ as prosecutor
• Notification of charges
• Jury rules
• CoJ Communiques
• Letters of Reprimand

Case 002 DB vs. Mirei

This case was the first time the Chamber of Justice expelled a member. Justicar Keirdagh Cantor established the precedent that all expulsions would be "in perpetua", meaning all expulsions would be permanent, they cannot be reversed.

Case 003 DB vs. Tiberius

This case actually touched upon a precedent set by the High Court of Inquisitions (the judicial system used by the Emperor's Hammer, a group the DJB was previously affiliated with), which was the automatic demotion to Apprentice for all members caught cheating. While this was followed for this case, this precedent has been overturned, and the Chamber now tailors cheating sentences to the severity of the specific act. This case also set the precedent for cooperation between the Headmaster and the Chamber of Justice when it comes to crimes committed in the Shadow Academy. The Headmaster is given reign over the Academy and can punish inappropriate behavior, but he keeps the Justicar informed, and for cases of recidivism, the Chamber will prosecute. In summary:

• Auto-demotion to APP for Cheating [no longer in use]
• Headmaster-Justicar cooperation

Case 004 DB vs. DarkWarchief

This case was the first to use the original Dark Covenant, which began as merely a list of bylaws that members of the Brotherhood were expected to follow, before it evolved into the more comprehensive document we have today. In addition, this case was the first prosecution of a member for what the Dark Covenant now terms "harassment", which established the fact that members can be held accountable for their words. In summary:

• Original Dark Covenant used
• First "Harassment" case

Case 006 DB vs. Gilkane

The defendant in this case challenged the authority of the Chamber of Justice, in effect saying they had no jurisdiction over his actions, and refusing to participate in the proceedings. Justicar Keirdagh Cantor determined a refusal to participate would result in an automatic guilty plea, and moved forward with the proceedings against the defendant. In addition, the case centered around the theft of property from the Dark Brotherhood Player's Association (the DB group who played Star Wars: Galaxies), and this case set the precedent that the property of the DBPA was the property of the entire DB, and therefore taking that property was considered theft. In summary:

• Authority of the Chamber
• Automatic Guilty Plea for noncooperation
• DBPA property = DB property

Case 007 DB vs. Oberst

This case led to three important developments in the judicial area of the Brotherhood. The first was the creation of the Statute of Limitations, to prevent the use of years-old evidence from being used as it was in this case. The second was the creation of the Harassment clause of the Covenant, since at the time there was no appropriate statute with which to prosecute the defendant. Third was the guarantee placed into Article VIII, Section 8.03(b), which says that once a complaint is submitted, the member's rights in that complaint shall not expire until a full conclusion of the case. Finally, it led to the Chamber's policy on motions, which is that no motions of any kind are recognized during Chamber proceedings. In summary:

• Statute of Limitations
• Harassment clause
• Article VIII, Section 8.03(b)
• Motions policy

Case 008 DB vs. Kromtal

In this case, the defendant refused to participate in the proceedings, so following the precedent set in 006 DB vs Gilkane, an automatic guilty plea was entered and the proceedings continued. However, following this case it was decided that the process would be more fair if this practice was changed - so a new precedent was set, for members who refuse to participate, an automatic not-guilty plea would be entered and a trial begun. This case also revolved around comments posted on Wookieepedia by a Brotherhood member, which had directly negative effects on the leader of the Emperor's Hammer (a group the DJB was previously affiliated with) and were grossly inappropriate. The defendant claimed that since the comments were not made on a Brotherhood website, he could not be prosecuted by the Chamber of Justice. However the Justicar determined that based on the wording of the Disreputable Behavior clause, and the direct relationship between the Brotherhood and the Emperor's Hammer, the Chamber did have jurisdiction in this case. However, this jurisdiction was narrow, and all future cases of this type would have to be explored case-by-case. In summary:

• Move from automatic-guilty to automatic not-guilty
• Actions taken on non-DB websites by DB members are in Chamber jurisdiction

Case 009 DB vs. Halc

This case created two procedural precedents for the Chamber of Justice. The first was the use of the Justicar's Opinion, a summary of the case and explanations of the decisions made during the case posted by the Justicar with each case report. The second was the establishment of the Recusal rule, which allows a Hand of Justice to recuse himself from proceedings, and permits the Justicar to replace them for the case at hand.

Case 013 DB vs. Bane

In this case the defendant perpetrated a fraud upon several members of the Brotherhood to obtain access to administrative portions of the website that were inappropriate for his position. He used this access to make unauthorized changes to several parts of the website. He was charged with dereliction of duty and disreputable behavior, but it was decided after this case to add a "Hacking" charge to the Covenant.

Case 015 DB vs. Tissaya

This was the first time the Chamber of Justice had tried the same Brotherhood member twice for the same offense. It was determined the recidivism would be treated harshly, and therefore the precedent was set for more severe sentences in cases of repeat crimes.

Case 017 DB vs. Cannabisia / Case 018 DB vs. Khobai

These cases were for the same event, and therefore brought forth the same precedents. During the jury portion of these trials, evidence was brought to the Justicar which clearly showed that the defendants were not guilty of the crimes they had been accused of. The Justicar used this exculpatory evidence to end the trials and declare both defendants innocent. This had never been done before, and this precedent was later added into the Dark Covenant as Article VIII, Section 8.03(p). In addition, this case brought to head a trend that had been occurring in recent cases of very large defense teams whose disorganization dramatically slowed the trial process. The Justicar set a new policy on defense teams which stated that only the defendant and one person chosen as "lead counsel" can make statements before the Chamber on behalf of the defendant. In summary:

• Exculpatory evidence rule
• Defense team limits

Case 024 DB vs. Raidoner

During the investigation phase of this trial the Chamber had several discussions with the DBPA Tribune. After the case had concluded the Chamber reviewed his testimony and determined that he had acted inappropriately and had perjured himself in his testimony. The Justicar issued him a Letter of Reprimand for his actions, which set the precedent that providing false statements to the Chamber can result in punishment.

Case 025 DB vs. Sashar

In this case the defendant was prosecuted for statements he made on IRC which violated a prior warning given to him by the Justicar. There were arguments made that actions taken on IRC only violate the Brotherhood's IRC Guidelines, which state that most penalties for IRC behavior will take place via IRC (kicks, bans, etc). However, the Justicar outlined that while this is true for most behavior - those behaviors which violate the Dark Covenants harassment clause can be prosecuted by the Chamber of Justice.

Those are all of the important precedents as of now, as cases continue to be tried there will be more precedents set, and this section of the course will be expanded. The links in the case names all take you to the individual case summary pages, and you can find a full list of all the case summaries on the Chamber Case History page of the DJBWiki. I highly recommend that everyone taking this course take some time to read through all the cases, each one summarizes the events, the trial, and contains a section which highlights topics of importance that were raised during the trials.

6 - Conclusion

The Chamber of Justice serves to protect the fun and safe environment the Brotherhood has established. In an ideal Brotherhood, the Chamber would never have anything to do - however in reality, with so many members of different personalities and cultures, mixed in with the anonymity of the internet, some issues always arise. Members who are interested in maintaining a harmonious relationship in our club are always in demand, and those of you who complete this course are uniquely situation to help the Chamber keep the Brotherhood fun for everyone. As you are taking part in day-to-day Brotherhood activities, remember that the best defense for a member is to avoid the Chamber of Justice altogether, and try to impress this upon your Clanmates.

In addition, those of you who have passed the introductory course and also pass this course are in a very small field of members with strong interest and knowledge of the Brotherhood's judicial system. It is your duty to apply for positions within the Chamber of Justice, to serve the Brotherhood. This is an honor, as most members of the Brotherhood will never be able to serve, and I hope to work with many of you in the future.

Exam

Question 1: True/False: If an act is committed which is legal, but later made illegal by a new law, the member who committed the act cannot be prosecuted for it.

A: True

Question 2: What isn't admissible in the Chamber of Justice?

A: Hearsay testimony

Question 3: True/False: The Justicar can summarily dismiss charges during a trial.

A: True

Question 4: Which case set the precedent for expulsion in perpetua?

A: Case 002

Question 5: Which case set the precedent for the recusal rule?

A: Case 009

Question 6: Which case set the precedent for increased sentences for repeat offenders?

A: Case 015

Question 7: How many juries are required to expel a member?

A: 2

Question 8: Define cloning in your own words. Why is cloning not permitted?

A: Answers vary

Question 9: What part of the Statute of Limitations clause confuses most members?

A: This policy is commonly misunderstood, almost always for the same reason - the complaint must be brought within three months of the discovery of the underlying event. If a crime is committed today, but it is not discovered that the crime was committed until six months later - it can still be brought to the Chamber, because the three-month countdown starts on the date of discovery. This was put into place to prevent members from escaping prosecution by merely waiting for the three month period to end.

Question 10: How many times can a member be prosecuted for Harassment? For Cheating?

A: Answers vary

Question 11: Explain "preponderance of the evidence".

A: Answers vary

Question 12: Name the four major sources of Brotherhood law.

A: Dark Covenant, Rites of Combat, IRC Guidelines, Judicial decrees

Question 13: What are the two major types of law the Brotherhood uses? Give a brief description of each.

A: statutory law and common

Question 14: Why are precedents important for the Chamber of Justice?

A: Answers vary

Question 15: Why does the Chamber use a mixture of two major types of law? What are the benefits? What is the downside?

A: Answers vary

Question 16: What is the relationship between 006 DB vs. Gilkane and 008 DB vs. Kromtal?

A: Answers vary

Question 17: Explain the importance of the protections given by the Statute of Limitations, Ex Post Facto, and Double Jeopardy. Do not merely recite their definitions; why are these protections important for Brotherhood members?

A: Answers vary

Question 18: Choose either 006 DB vs. Gilkane, 008 DB vs. Kromtal, or 018 DB vs. Khobai and write a detailed brief on the case. Include all the important facts, controversial issues, all precedents set, and your explanation for why those decisions were made. Also include an evaluation of the choices made by the Chamber of Justice -- what would you have done the same? differently? (This answer should be at least 500 words long)

A: Answers vary