SACN Suit against Morioka Naoko.

[Zack]

It would not be long after his detainment that Wazu's own expert on Yamatain law would get involved. Though she declined to state her own name, she did manage to send copies of the suit to media outlets, the Yamatain department of justice, the SAoY, and Ketsurui Yui herself.

On behalf of Heram J. Wazu,

For:
* Conspiring to arrest without charge, Violation of 4-4 of Yamatai law.
* Excessive force, Violation of 4-4 of Yamatai law.
* Arrest without charge, and confiscation of personal property, Violation of 6-5 of Yamatai law.

My client seeks:
* 1,000,000 KS in punitive damages for wrongful arrest and legal fees.
* A new datapad.
* Immediate release from detention.
* Disciplinary action taken against Morioka Naoko and her accomplices.

Summary:
As evidenced by the attached recordings SAoY soldiers are acting with extremely dishonorable conduct by attempting to destroy evidence as shown by the order to fry nearby recording devices.

It is also highly dishonorable to try to conduct an arrest without cause as no warrant was able to be provided upon request by the plantiff, and requests for display of warrant were ignored entirely when made by SAoY personnel.

Following this ‘resisting arrest’ charges were fabricated to place the plaintiff in detention to avoid responsibility for the defendant’s lack of cause for arrest.

The Plantiff was threatened with death and deportation, a violation of personal assurances of safety from Ketsurui Yui

This kind of misconduct would also be against sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 of Proposal 82 which is currently not law but working its way through the senate to prevent just the kind of misconduct that has gone on here.

The Plantiff seeks monetary damages, immediate release, and disciplinary action to be taken to fix the misconduct that has occurred within the SAoY ranks.

Recordings of the incident are attached.

 

[Doshii Jun]

OOC: The Yamataian Department of Justice can't be yet used in the RP. However, the judicial system is established, so I'm going to work from that. — Doshii

Common Court System, Civil Torts division

International Circuit, 3rd Panel

Mr. Wazu (Petitioner):

An alleged attorney, presumably on your behalf, has filed a civilian tort lawsuit against a member of the Star Army of Yamatai, Morioka Naoko (Respondent). Because this person who filed the lawsuit did not register their name with the Court, and the Court accepts lawsuits only from named Petitioners or their registered attorneys, this Panel would be well within its rights to render summary judgment in favor of the Respondent.

However, we recognize that this petition likely is to be filed again in the face of such a judgment. Therefore, this Panel chooses to proceed with executing judgment on this tort.

On the first complaint, "Conspiring to arrest without charge, Violation of 4-4 of Yamatai law," as well as part of the third complaint, "Arresting without charge" —

• 6-11 of the Criminal Code grants broad authority to members of the Star Army of Yamatai to detain suspects and make arrests. Based on what the Respondent stated she knew at the time, not including the pardon granted by the Empress of Yamatai, Ketsurui Yuumi, in YE 31, it was reasonably within the rights of the Respondent to arrest the Petitioner on suspicion of war crimes.

The Respondent's circumstances are unique. Being a Nekovalkyrja from a different era, Respondent is not only unfamiliar with new laws and customs, but unfamiliar with new ways to access data and records. Her assistant, a Taii, did not have the same levels of clearance as she did, and therefore could not confirm facts that would have ended the situation before it escalated.

Furthermore, the intelligence the Respondent had was enough to execute at least a detainment and an investigative 72-hour hold. Yamatai's civilian law enforcement agencies have executed investigative detainments using about the same level of intelligence — in this case, old reports of Wazu's crimes and how he allegedly absconded duty from Yamatai, as well as Nepleslia.

Despite the stated Respondent's dislike of the Petitioner, claims of a conspiracy become moot in the face of these facts.

Therefore, we find in favor of the Respondent on the first claim.

On the second complaint, "Excessive force, Violation of 4-4 of Yamatai law — "

The Petitioner was unclear as to which point of force was being discussed. We can assume only so much on this complaint, as circumstances changed between the first use of force and the second. We will work through both.

• 6-11 of the Criminal Code, as stated earlier, grants broad authority to make arrests, but also grants a level of limited immunity to the Empire and its agents as they carry out their duties. This includes "causing physical and emotional harm." Because the first claim and the first part of the third claim are found in favor of the Respondent, the second complaint already is threatened. In the face of the facts, it almost wholly is defeated.

During the commission of a lawful, if ultimately faulty, arrest, four instances of physical force were used — the first was to lay hands on the Petitioner, in order to detain him; the second was to stun him with a stun baton, a non-lethal method of pain compliance commonly employed by law enforcement; the third was to tackle the Petitioner after he evaded the first two uses of force; the fourth was to employ the stun baton again, this time successfully.

Though firearms eventually were drawn, none was pointed at the Petitioner. Had they been, excessive force had a potential claim. Even after the attempted evasion by the Petitioner, when the use of a Nekovalkyrja Service Pistol's stun setting could have legally been employed, the soldiers instead used pain compliance and numbers to subdue the Petitioner.

These facts show that in terms of force, the Star Army soldiers followed the appropriate scale to which civilian law enforcement binds itself.

There is one curious point of verbal force that the Petitioner highlighted, when the Respondent threatened the Petitioner with death. We cannot find any evidence in the reports from either party just what the threats were meant to illicit — threatening death as punishment as a result for the conviction of crimes is not unusual in police work, but almost always it is attached to a desire for information a suspect has but is unwilling to offer.

The Respondent makes no such deal, instead saying that death would be the final end if other parties did not want custody of the Petitioner.

Though it is narrow ground, here we believe that the Respondent's age, as well as her lack of updated knowledge, again plays a part. Such punishments were common to her era for soldiers who deserted, and those punishments still on occasion happen today. It was not outside the realm of her knowledge at the time to threaten such a punishment for his alleged crimes, whether such punishment ultimately would be carried out or not.

We therefore find in favor of the Respondent on the second complaint.

On the second part of the third complaint, "confiscation of personal property, Violation of 6-5 of Yamatai law" —

• 6-5 of the Criminal Code provides strong protection for the rightful owners of physical property. 6-5, however, is meant as a protection against fellow citizens unlawfully taking such property, not law enforcement lawfully confiscating such property during the commission of an arrest. The destruction of the property, however, was not warranted under the circumstances.

The datapad in question here is an AwesomeCorp DataJockey, one that the Respondent likely had not ever seen before. It continued to transmit after the conclusion of the Petitioner's arrest, and was destroyed shortly after this fact was discovered.

The confiscation of property during the commission of a lawful, even if later faulty, arrest is well documented among civilian and military law enforcement. 6-5 provides no protection from such a confiscation.

6-5 does not explicitly provide protection from destruction of property by law enforcement. There are times when such destruction is employed during the commission of a lawful arrest or execution of certain warrants (arrest, search). However, in this case no such destruction was required. Even with the Respondent's circumstances, there was no justification for destroying the datapad when turning it off and disabling the power source or harddrive was just as possible and, indeed, not much more difficult.

We therefore partially find in favor of the Petitioner.

Damages:

The Petitioner seeks 1,000,000 KS in punitive damages, a new datapad, release from the 72-hour investigative hold and disciplinary action against the Respondent and her agents.

We find the punitive damages to be wholly excessive, especially considering no registered attorney filed this tort, and the Petitioner did not file it himself either electronically or in person. Therefore, no monetary damages will be levied.

The Petitioner did not state exactly what type of datapad he had, only that it was an AwesomeCorp DataJockey. Therefore, we find the Respondent, or the Star Army of Yamatai, must afford 5,000 KS to the Petitioner so that he might buy his new datapad.

Mistakes were made in good faith, but in the end the arrest was flawed and cannot stand up in court. This includes the arrest by the Yamatai Security Agency that followed, as that arrest was tainted by the flawed arrest. We therefore vacate the hold against the Petitioner, effective immediately.

As to disciplinary action against the Respondent, we are powerless, as that matter is up to the military courts to decide. This tort and its accompanying docket has been forwarded to that court's clerks department in order to gain a ruling upon it.

CONCLUDED.

 

[Doshii Jun]

Military Tribunal System

In the case of Heram J. Wazu v. Morioka Naoko

The Mistress Taisho already has dealt with the Shosho. We choose not to act further than she has warranted appropriate.