Ed Murphy wrote: >I would use "UNKNOWN" for this. Mm. I think "UNPROVEN" is more descriptive. I'm influenced by the "unproven" verdict in Scottish criminal law. Why do you prefer "UNKNOWN"?
>And "NOT A CRIME" for this. That's the semantic, certainly, but I tried to make each of the judgements be a description that could be applied to the defendant. Thus "the defendant is GUILTY", "the defendant is EXCUSED", and so on. (I failed to do that for "UNPROVEN", though.) I spent ages on Wikipedia trying to find the RL legal term for "alleged conduct is not criminal", but couldn't find one: Wikipedia doesn't list it as an available plea or defence. Which could be quite scary if one were put in the dock on a charge of having long hair. >"Ninny" has traditionally been restricted to apologies. Yes, the widening is entirely deliberate. It's appropriate to have some special term here, analogous to RL "convict". I think "ninny" has been restricted due to its isolation in a single rule dealing with only the one form of punishment. >This deregisters the exile before they have a chance to appeal. No, the judgement doesn't become active until a week has passed. For precisely this reason. However, I ought to also amend R869 to apply the automatic 30-day exile only in cases of voluntary deregistration, so that an exile can return immediately if the sentence is belatedly appealed. Incidentally, we don't currently have any rules that assign any semantics to being in the chokey. Were there ever any? What sort of thing was intended to be prohibited to inmates? -zefram
