CoJ Case 069

This article is part of the series:

Chamber of Justice

Cases

001 DB vs. Blade 002 DB vs. Mirei 003 DB vs. Tiberius 004 DB vs. DarkWarchief 005 DB vs. Selket 006 DB vs. Gilkane 007 DB vs. Oberst 008 DB vs. Kromtal 009 DB vs. Halc 010 DB vs. Boba nil 011 DB vs. Dismal 012 DB vs. Tissaya 013 DB vs. Bane 014 DB vs. Ashura 015 DB vs. Tissaya 016 DB vs. Jaymz 017 DB vs. Cannabisia 018 DB vs. Khobai 019 DB vs. Ricco 020 DB vs. Ricco 021 DB vs. Cornix 022 DB vs. Drepo Mcarc 023 DB vs. Jason Hunter 024 DB vs. Raidoner 025 DB vs. Sashar 026 DB vs. Androc 027 DB vs. Krandon 028 DB vs. Braecen 029 DB vs. Jalek 030 DB vs. Arack 031 DB vs. Archangel 032 DB vs. Raidoner 033 DB vs. Robin Hawk 034 DB vs. Coop Ter-an 035 DB vs. Coop Ter-an 036 DB vs. Darkone 037 DB vs. Wuntila 038 DB vs. Fremoc Pepoi 039 DB vs. Solus Gar 040 DB vs. Arden Karn 041 DB vs. Ronovi Tavisaen 042 DB vs. Delak Krennel 043 DB vs. Rayna Krennel 044 DB vs. Darkblade 045 DB vs. Chizz 046 DB vs. Shorurra 047 DB vs. Turel Sorenn 048 DB vs. Nicolai "Rod" Rodell 049 DB vs. Seraphol Ceartas 050 DB vs. Calix Iberian 051 DB vs. Drake Starfire 052 DB vs. Tyron Kesh 053 DB vs. Corell Fedt 054 DB vs. JCT 055 DB vs. Vexatus 056 DB vs. Kadrol Hauen 057 DB vs. Xanos Zorrixor 058 DB vs. Arvalis Raith 059 DB vs. Kadrol Hauen 060 DB vs. Kromtal Bloodfyre Romanae 061 DB vs. Andrelious J. Mimosa-Inahj 062 DB vs. AnthonyH 063 DB vs. Hakatsuki 064 DB vs. Soren Leonis 065 DB vs. Magik 066 DB vs. Creon 067 DB vs. Hatchi Aso-Gui Sol-Corvo 068 DB vs. Andrelious J. Inahj 069 DB vs. Aru Law 070 DB vs. Esbelta Teresa Amaral 071 DB vs. Nora Olen di Plagia

DB vs Aru Law, #15665 was the sixty-ninth case tried by the Chamber of Justice. The sitting Justicar was Darth Renatus, the Left Hand of Justice was Qormus Aquila, and the Right Hand of Justice was Ood Bnar.

Basic Case Information

Defendant

• Aru Law, #15665

Charges

• One Count: Violation of Covenant section 7.06(g) - Crude Behavior

Verdict

• GUILTY

Sentence

• Letter of Reprimand permanently applied to the member’s dossier;
• Strict Probation for 3 months followed by 3 months General Probation.

Related News Post

Members of the Dark Jedi Brotherhood,

The Chamber of Justice has convened and issued a verdict in the pending case of DB v. Aru Law. Following an investigation, Aru was charged with one count of Crude Behavior.

The detailed Verdict and Justicar's Opinion for the case can be found in the PDF file linked below. Please note that the written opinion is generally found on the page after announcement of the verdict.

The verdict was as follows:

Case #069 - DB v. Aru Law - Opinion PDF

• One Count of Crude Behavior: GUILTY
• Punishment:
  • Letter of Reprimand permanently applied to the member’s dossier;
  • Strict Probation for 3 months followed by 3 months General Probation.

Signed and sealed in Justice,

Darth Renatus Justicar of the Dark Jedi Brotherhood

Justicar's Opinion

Facts

On May 31, 2023, Aru engaged in conversation with another member in the Discord channel #Gaming-chat. This conversation pertained to the application of AI (a growing industry that is proving to be polarizing) and most notably how NVIDIA intends to utilize AI systems in their future game releases. The other member entered into the conversation to provide their own perspective on the topic. This conversation turned heated as the two disagreed on the subject. It continued to escalate several times and ended in a final cautionary message warning of “Tell me again not to be hype about something and you’ll have problems” from Aru.

At this point, Aru proceeds to resign from their position and submit a transfer request to join the Rogues. The transfer request proves to be as heated as the conversation itself, but full of direct attacks towards the other member. Due to the nature of the remarks, they will not be repeated within this section. To summarize, they include racial profiling based on the name of the other member, excessive swearing, and overall heightened aggression. The contents of this request were automatically shared via site notification emails to the entirety of the chain of command.

The MAA pushed back on the transfer request as per policy, where it was replaced with "Changed the original text because you didn't like it. Just get me out".

Aru did not choose to enter a plea or engage with the Chamber in any meaningful manner throughout this process, leaving him unable to enter evidence on his behalf.

Analysis

This is a unique situation to the recollection of this body. There have been many "airing of grievances" in unit transfer requests in the long history of this club and none have landed before the Chamber. However, due to the preponderance of evidence and the accompaniment of a formal complaint, the Chamber opted to conduct a full investigation into the matter and weigh if charges were warranted.

In an ideal world this situation could have been handled gracefully through mediation. However, and in keeping with a past pattern of behavior, Aru did not allow for that. Instead, the member opted to utilize a public but closed forum to attack the other member and then flee from reprisal. Due to the heated nature of the initial argument, which had been removed from the public chat, and the wording of the transfer request itself, we felt it necessary to proceed and issue a charge.

The arguments of the case ultimately fell upon the wording of Cov. 7.06(g) which included "unabated insults toward another’s real-life political affiliation, nationality, gender, race, color, age, disability, military service, creed, heritage, or sexual orientation". The emphasis here was on the interpretation of "unabated". It was argued that without a history of formal mediation the definition could not be met. However, it is the opinion of the Chamber that a member's current actions stand on their own merit. Beyond that, due to the closed nature of unit transfer requests while remaining public, this was the equivalent of spray painting public property. That is to say it was willful, malicious, and surprisingly hate-filled.

Further, there is weight in the threat of "you'll have problems" from a member such as Aru. They are a member that has stood in positions of leadership, with the appearance of influence, and an active position with one of our club's active modes of activity. What can be seen as empty words from anyone else cease to be when the disparity of power is brought into the equation, especially when directed at a new member who might perceive that dynamic as greater than it is.

In the end, with the absence of dialogue, we are unable to take any other course of action.

Sentencing

As a member of the Brotherhood having held summit positions and even the Envoy Corps, they have a long history without prior encounter with the Chamber. In speaking to their prior House and Clan summits, we found character statements pertaining to similar past behavior. Furthermore, Aru refused to take part in this process, opting to take a parting shot at the Chamber itself before ceasing all communication.

However, the Left Hand came to their defense with quality arguments and considerations. Taking those into account, measured by the ever increasing importance of protecting the membership from growing divisiveness and aggression, the Chamber had no choice but to rule against the accused. When looking at the precedence of DB v. Kadrol Hauen, DB 059, where three counts of Crude Behavior were presented, and weighing it with the arguments of the defense, the Chamber opted to go with a reduced sentence than the maximum allowed.

It is never a joyous moment to mete out sentencing. Rather, it is a moment of regret that no other avenues could be managed and it remains this Chamber's responsibility to do so.

/s/ Renatus