Note: In this trial, I am using a style of legal citation wherein the name of the case is "plaintiff" v "defendant", followed by the bracketed year in which the request was made, and a number denoting the ordinal number of that case in the sequence of other cases made in that year of that name. Multiple parties are shortened to the first party "& Anor" or "& Ors". Please contact me for clarification if necessary. This case may be referred to under this system as Figasaur v Godomasta (2019)2.

Introduction

1 The plaintiff was Figasaur ( u/CivFigasaur ), who were their own legal representative in court, bringing a case against Godomasta ( u/Godomasta ) who was not represented in court. The trial request was made here on the 3rd of May, 2019 (UTC), and the trial was here, initiated on the 21st of May 2019 (UTC) and finished on the 2nd of June 2019 (UTC). I, Judge AllenY, took the request and presided over this trial at the law of Mount Augusta, and am hereby giving judgment on the 3rd of June 2019 (UTC).

2 The plaintiff brought a charge of one count of Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 ("Theft of Property"). The defendant made no plea, and thus I must decide on the matter of their innocence or guilt. If they are guilty, I must sentence them as is appropriate.

3 The action comprising the breach of law is alleged to have been that the defendant did not pay the reparations of 32 diamonds as required by Figasaur v Godomasta & Anor (2019)1. Under Mount Augusta Criminal Code 600.01 5., it is said that unpaid reparations for a violation may be tried under Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01, and it was indeed under this section that the defendant was previously charged.

Acts constituting a breach of Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01

4 The acts in question are best characterised as "a. Intentionally tak[ing] and ... retain[ing] possession of property of another without the other's consent and with intent to deprive the owner of possession of such property", as per Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 1. While technically the defendant never actively took anything, the spirit of the law is clear when Mount Augusta Criminal Code 600.01 5. refers to theft, in that the defendant takes by not giving what is due. The 32 diamonds can also be understood to constitute property in the context of this section.

5 Mount Augusta Criminal Code 600.01 5. also refers to payment in "a timely manner (as defined by the judge during sentencing)"; failing this is a precondition for being charged. azkedar J in Figasaur v Godomasta & Anor (2019)1 defined timeliness as 7 days, which has long passed (the case was decided on the 18th of April 2019 (UTC), and it is now the 3rd of June 2019 UTC, more than a month). The conclusion reached here must be that if the defendant did in fact fail to pay reparations, they would be guilty.

Evidence

6 The plaintiff provided evidence that the defendant had not paid reparations, and would not do so. This evidence was clear, and convincing to the Court. However, in any case, as per Mount Augusta Criminal Code 600.01 5., the onus is on the defendant to prove their fulfilment of the action required of them. The burden of proof was not discharged by the defendant. Taken together, the burden of proof required by Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 2., "clear and convincing evidence" that the defendant did in fact commit the acts in question, is fulfilled, to the standard defined of the burden in Mount Augusta Criminal Code 900.02.

Conclusion

7 In conclusion, the Court finds the defendant, Godomasta, guilty of the one charge of Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 brought against them by the plaintiff, Figasaur. Here ends the verdict.

Sentencing

8 Given I have found you guilty, Godomasta, I must now sentence you as the law sets out.

9 Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 3. provides that "[o]ne count will result in three days to six days Prison Pearl or Exile Pearl"; there are no other relevant laws that apply to your sentencing.

10 I sentence you on a variety of grounds. One is as retribution for the victim; this applies here. Another ground on which I sentence you is to deter you and others from committing similar acts; this also applies here; due to your absence, there is necessarily nothing led that suggests you would refrain from a similar act again. I also sentence you to denounce this act. Finally, I sentence you to encourage your rehabilitation, that you may take time to consider your actions, though your inactivity at the present time dulls this point a little, as it is unlikely the crime will be fresh in your mind when you are pearled.

11 I do not sentence you to incapacitate you from committing crime; as this was born of inaction, such a sentence would be ineffective, and the crime committed in Figasaur v Godomasta & Anor (2019)1 which led to this would not be incapacitated by pearling either, if we consider incapacitation more broadly. You have not, to my knowledge, been convicted of any other offences, and I do not consider you likely to commit more crime, owing to your inactivity in part as this may be.

12 The balance of these factors suggests to me I impose a sentence on the harsher end of the discretion available to me. Contrary to the law, you wilfully and unrepentantly deprive the plaintiff of a notable sum, which was not only their just reward, but clearly awarded in a court of law for your earlier wrongdoing. However, as I have noted, there are some more minor factors that point in your favour.

13 I hereby sentence you, Godomasta, to 5 days' prison pearl. You must turn yourself in to Mount Augusta authorities to begin serving this sentence. Additionally, as per Mount Augusta Criminal Code 200.01 4., you pay reparations to the plaintiff decided between you and the plaintiff, unless you cannot agree, in which case you may pursue arbitration or judgment by me, as per the aforementioned law. You may not be released until reparations are settled. Here ends the sentencing. Lex paciferat.