Multiple different unconstitutional actions and decisions were made in violation of Gantoe's right to due process during the course of this trial. Some objectively affected the outcome (3) and some almost certainly affected the outcome (1 and 2).

1) The clearly incorrect trial procedure was proposed and the judge refused to correct the mistake.

Not a huge deal by itself initially, honest mistake perhaps. Tvman was using some sort of custom or perhaps improperly transcribed procedure that does not appear anywhere in the constitution. It neither resembles the procedure for in-game trials (it's MISSING four steps from that one), nor subreddit trials (it has two EXTRA steps from that one). Not that there's a choice, subreddit trials have to use the subreddit one, of course. The main problem was that his invented procedure had the prosecution present two halves of their case, with defense pleas in the middle. Subreddit trials (III.C.iv.a-e) have one prosecution block, followed by one defense block, period. Why he insisted on pursuing his strange, made-up procedure even after it was pointed out as wrong is unclear. He gave no reasoning for this, just "this is what we will be doing."

"What procedure we are using" was not his decision to make, though. As per Article III.B.2.a:

a. The Judge will have no power except the powers outlined in this Constitution.

...and nowhere is the power to "decide the procedure for a trial on the fly" given, so judges cannot do that. In fact, the constitution even goes out of its way to say that they have a duty to use the exact procedures listed, in Article III.B.ii.b:

b. The Judge will keep a detailed account of the trial, and run all court cases through /r/mtaugustajustice following the procedure outlined under Article III Subsection C. If a case in handled in-game, a record must be posted on /r/mtaugustajustice.

2) The_Hobbyist also colluded with this illegal procedure, also for no clear legal reason.

One could say "he felt he needed to follow the judge's request", but A) That's not even true. You don't have to follow judge's orders when they're given with no authority and when they're asking you to break the law, and B) I offered him an easy solution anyway where he could have BOTH followed tvman's strange orders (even though such orders carry no legal weight) AND still abided by legally correct procedures, easily resolving the problem: all he had to do was promise to say nothing during his "second phase" of tvman's procedure, and it would effectively have become the correct procedure again. In other words:

[prosecution] > [defense] > [silence] > [defense] > [verdict] is functionally equivalent to:

[prosecution] > [defense] > [verdict]

Yet, Hobbyist simply refused even to do this, out of what I can only guess is spite and/or stubbornness? Not sure, but whatever the reaosn, certainly no good, LEGAL reason was given. He chose completely unnecessarily to also break the law and go out of proper order despite having been shown the relevant laws and despite having been given an easy way out that would satisfy all constraints (real or imagined ones)

As a result of violations from the judge (1) and the prosecution (2), the timeline of the trial went completely wrong and was very biased, like this:

• The prosecution gave only half their case instead of their full case like they should have. I specifically asked them to give their full case for this reason but was ignored.

• The defense gave their full case (plea arguments), which was the only way for the defense not to break the law while still making the best attempt to defend Gantoe.

• The prosecution then illegally gave another half of their case. This was in blatant violation of the constitution, which says that the prosecution gets NO additional turns for arguments after the defense in a subreddit trial.

• The defense was then unable to respond without, again, breaking the law. So the prosecution ended up unreasonably and unconstitutionally getting the last word, and getting twice as many arguments. Many of the things they said were completely wrong, misleading, had evidence that could have been given to refute them, etc. etc., yet the defense's hands were tied. We could not defend against them without violating the constitution. This gave the prosecution a massive and illegal advantage and bias. I predicted this mess would happen at the very start, and cited precedent for it having caused messes, but was (again, for no clear reaosn) ignored.

• The verdict was rendered, and mentioned several points of logic that were made in the prosecution's second half of arguments. Did tvman come up with these himself? Or did he get them from the illegal and un-defendable second half of prosecution arguments? It's impossible to say, which is why this is a dirty trial that must be retried.

That massive advantage is by itself much more than sufficient for a mistrial, but there were was yet ANOTHER violation as well:

3) After all of the above, Tvman also included an illegal sentence in his ruling that he does not have the power to do.

He found Gantoe guilty of 100.04: severe griefing. Okay, fine so far (aside from biased procedure). But then he made up his own sentencing rule for what 100.04 does that doesn't exist, which is NOT okay. 100.04 states:

1. Result

a. This may be escalated one degree in sentencing this will fall under the purview of the judge.

Gantoe was only guilty of one other griefing charge: 100.01, which is first degree griefing. There is no higher degree. Thus, 100.04 legally cannot do anything to his sentence, since all it can do is raise the degree of a crime.

Tvman, instead of following what the law clearly says (i.e. it has no effect), just decided to add a non-existent clause to the law instead that "If you can't raise a degree, just add a second charge."

It should go without saying that judges do not have the power to simply add clauses to the criminal code mid-trial:

i. The judge of the case will decide guilt or innocence on the charges, as well as the amount of time to be served, as per the Mount Augusta Criminal Code.

not "as per what he or she makes up on the spot"

We call for a retrial with a new judge, due to numerous violations of procedure and sentencing, none of which the defense caved in to or participated in (despite even outright threats... "this is your last warning").

Even if a retrial is not granted, we secondarily request, at a bare minimum, that the remainder of the government confirm that Gantoe's sentence be commuted from 17 to 10 days, to reflect the fact that 7 of his days of sentencing were based on a criminal code rule/clause that does not exist at all and was made up during the trial.