Difference between revisions of "Legal Matters"

From RPGnet
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Homicide and the Legal System)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==The Patriot Act==
 
==The Patriot Act==
−
===Provision 213===
 
  
−
SEC. 213. AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT.  
+
Praised by some, criticised by others, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act USA Patriot Act] is one of the defining pieces of legislation from the days following [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_Terrorist_Attack September 11th, 2001].  Seen by most as an "anti-terrorism" law, the Patriot Act's purpose is largely to expand law-enforcement powers to keep up with advancing technology.  Simply put: if the authorities were formerly able to seize your
 +
mail or faxes, or were able to wiretap you, once they had a warrant,
 +
they can now also (with a warrant) seize your voicemails and email and
 +
chat logs and such.  The act also includes a string of commands for intelligence agencies to do their jobs better - to share information with each other, to hire more translators, etc.  
  
−
Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
+
The full text of the Patriot Act can be found [http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12251&c=207 here].  That said, the intricacies of government legal jargon are not the easiest things to understand.  See commentaries from [http://slate.msn.com/id/2087984/ the slate.com] and [http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12126&c=207 the aclu].  Also see [[ The Patriot Act For Dummies]].
  
−
* (1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ' before `In addition'; and
+
===Changes in Section 412===
−
* (2) by adding at the end the following:
+
The Patriot Act in the world of the American Gods game contains one key difference from the one in the real world.  This difference appears in Section 412, '''MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW.'''
−
** (b) DELAY- With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed if--
 
−
* (1) the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result (as defined in section 2705);
 
−
* (2) the warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property, any wire or electronic communication (as defined in section 2510), or, except as expressly provided in chapter 121, any stored wire or electronic information, except where the court finds reasonable necessity for the seizure; and
 
−
* (3) the warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution, which period may thereafter be extended by the court for good cause shown.'.
 
  
−
 
+
The Section discusses the rules under which the Attorney General may take suspected terrorists into custody.  The differences appear in three paragraphs, quoted below (the differences appear in italics):
−
 
+
* (1) CUSTODY - the Attorney General shall take into custody any alien who is certified under paragraph (3) ''and any deceased bodies and organic materials involved in acts certified aliens engaged in to so certify them.''
−
===Sneak-and-Peek searches'''===
+
* (2) RELEASE- Except as provided in paragraphs (5) and (6), the Attorney General shall maintain custody of such an alien ''or alien material'' until the alien is removed from the United States. Except as provided in paragraph (6), such custody shall be maintained irrespective of any relief from removal for which the alien ''or alien material'' may be eligible, or any relief from removal granted the alien, until the Attorney General determines that the alien is no longer an alien who may be certified under paragraph (3). If the alien is finally determined not to be removable, detention pursuant to this subsection shall terminate.
−
Extend the authority of FISA searches to any criminal search.  This allows for secret searches of one's home and property without prior notice.
+
* (3) CERTIFICATION - The Attorney General may certify an alien under this paragraph if the Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe that the alien -
−
 
 
−
Much of the backlash against the USA PATRIOT Act has been directed at the provisions for Sneak-and-Peek searches.  Critics[http://talkleft.com/new_archives/000279.html] argue that Provision 213 authorizes "surreptitious search warrants and seizures upon a showing of ''reasonable necessity'' and eliminates the requirement of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that immediate notification of seized items be provided."
 
−
 
 
−
In special cases covered by [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act|FISA]] (incorporated in the USA PATRIOT Act), the warrants may come from the [[United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court|Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]] (FISC) instead of a common Federal or State Court.  FISC warrants are not public record and therefore are not required to be released.  Other warrants must be released, especially to the person under investigation.
 
−
 
 
−
A second complaint against Sneak-and-Peek searches is that the owner of the property (or person identified in business/library records) does not have to be told about the search.  There is a special clause that allows the Director of the FBI to request phone records for a person without ever notifying the person.  For all other searches, the person must be notified, but not necessarily before the search.  The judge providing the warrant may allow a delay in notification when there is risk of:
 
−
* endangering the life or physical safety of an individual;
 
−
* flight from prosecution;
 
−
* destruction of or tampering with evidence;
 
−
* intimidation of potential witnesses; or
 
−
* otherwise seriously jeopardizing an investigation or unduly delaying a trial.
 
−
The delays are on average 7 days, but have been as long as 90 days. [http://www.factcheck.org/article259.html]
 
−
Section 213, which federal agencies report they have used 155 times since 2001, does not expire later this year like other Patriot Act provisions.
 
−
 
 
−
The American Civil Liberties Union argues that the term "serious jeopardy" is too broad "and must be narrowly curtailed."[http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=1776]
 
−
 
 
−
''See also'': [United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
===Provision 412===
 
−
[Authorizes the Attorney General authority to order a brief detention of aliens without any prior showing or court ruling that the person is dangerous.]  Section 412, United States Code, is amended - alien material is further defined as deceased bodies and organic materials involved in acts of terroism.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
'''SEC. 412. MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW.'''
 
−
* (a) IN GENERAL- The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 236 the following:
 
−
 
 
−
'''MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW
 
−
SEC. 236A. (a) DETENTION OF TERRORIST ALIENS-'''
 
−
* (1) CUSTODY- The Attorney General shall take into custody any alien who is certified under paragraph (3).
 
−
* (2) RELEASE- Except as provided in paragraphs (5) and (6), the Attorney General shall maintain custody of such an alien or alien material until the alien is removed from the United States. Except as provided in paragraph (6), such custody shall be maintained irrespective of any relief from removal for which the alien or alien material may be eligible, or any relief from removal granted the alien, until the Attorney General determines that the alien is no longer an alien who may be certified under paragraph (3). If the alien is finally determined not to be removable, detention pursuant to this subsection shall terminate.
 
−
* (3) CERTIFICATION- The Attorney General may certify an alien under this paragraph if the Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe that the alien--
 
 
** (A) is described in section 212(a)(3)(A)(i), 212(a)(3)(A)(iii), 212(a)(3)(B), 237(a)(4)(A)(i), 237(a)(4)(A)(iii), or 237(a)(4)(B); or
 
** (A) is described in section 212(a)(3)(A)(i), 212(a)(3)(A)(iii), 212(a)(3)(B), 237(a)(4)(A)(i), 237(a)(4)(A)(iii), or 237(a)(4)(B); or
 
** (B) is engaged in any other activity that endangers the national security of the United States.
 
** (B) is engaged in any other activity that endangers the national security of the United States.
−
** (C) is declared deceased, upon declaration all organic material becomes materials in accordance with 213. Materials remain subject to 213 until the Attorney General determines that the material is no longer an threat as defined by section 412 and 213. If the alien material is finally determined not to be removable, detention pursuant to this subsection shall terminate.
+
** ''(C) is declared deceased, upon declaration all organic material becomes materials in accordance with 213.''
−
* (4) NONDELEGATION- The Attorney General may delegate the authority provided under paragraph (3) only to the Deputy Attorney General. The Deputy Attorney General may not delegate such authority.
+
 
−
* (5) COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS- The Attorney General shall place an alien or alien material detained under paragraph (1) in removal proceedings, or shall charge the alien with a criminal offense, not later than 7 days after the commencement of such detention. If the requirement of the preceding sentence is not satisfied, the Attorney General shall release the alien.  Alien material is subject to research and development by requisition on goverment agencies or government contract.
 
−
* (6) LIMITATION ON INDEFINITE DETENTION- An alien detained solely under paragraph (1),(2),(3) who has not been removed under section 241(a)(1)(A), and whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the release of the alien will threaten the national security of the United States or the safety of the community or any person.
 
−
* (7) REVIEW OF CERTIFICATION- The Attorney General shall review the certification made under paragraph (3) every 6 months. If the Attorney General determines, in the Attorney General's discretion, that the certification should be revoked, the alien may be released on such conditions as the Attorney General deems appropriate, unless such release is otherwise prohibited by law. The alien may request each 6 months in writing that the Attorney General reconsider the certification and may submit documents or other evidence in support of that request.
 
−
** (b) HABEAS CORPUS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW-
 
−
* (1) IN GENERAL- Judicial review of any action or decision relating to this section (including judicial review of the merits of a determination made under subsection (a)(3) or (a)(6)) is available exclusively in habeas corpus proceedings consistent with this subsection. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, no court shall have jurisdiction to review, by habeas corpus petition or otherwise, any such action or decision.
 
−
* (2) APPLICATION-
 
−
** (A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2241(a) of title 28, United States Code, habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1) may be initiated only by an application filed with--
 
−
*** (i) the Supreme Court;
 
−
*** (ii) any justice of the Supreme Court;
 
−
*** (iii) any circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; or
 
−
*** (iv) any district court otherwise having jurisdiction to entertain it.
 
−
** (B) APPLICATION TRANSFER- Section 2241(b) of title 28, United States Code, shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus described in subparagraph (A).
 
−
* (3) APPEALS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2253 of title 28, in habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1) before a circuit or district judge, the final order shall be subject to review, on appeal, by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. There shall be no right of appeal in such proceedings to any other circuit court of appeals.
 
−
* (4) RULE OF DECISION- The law applied by the Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall be regarded as the rule of decision in habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1).
 
−
** (a) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION- The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to any other provision of this Act.'.
 
−
** (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of contents of the Immigration and Nationality Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 236 the following:
 
−
Sec. 236A. Mandatory detention of suspected terrorist; habeas corpus; judicial review.'.
 
−
** (c) REPORTS- Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the Attorney General shall submit a report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, with respect to the reporting period, on--
 
−
*(1) the number of aliens certified under section 236A(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by subsection (a);
 
−
* (2) the grounds for such certifications;
 
−
* (3) the nationalities of the aliens so certified;
 
−
* (4) the length of the detention for each alien so certified; and
 
−
* (5) the number of aliens so certified who--
 
−
** (A) were granted any form of relief from removal;
 
−
** (B) were removed;
 
−
** (C) the Attorney General has determined are no longer aliens who may be so certified; or
 
−
** (D) were released from detention,
 
−
** (E) were declared alien material subject to 213.
 
  
  
 
==State vs. Reagan==
 
==State vs. Reagan==
−
''''EXCERPT'''' Maryland State vs. [[Thomas Reagan]], January 28th 2005: Report one Tom Reagan (Survivor #216) caused the disintigration of every vehicle within a 9 mile radius of the town of [http://www.oaklandmd.com/home.asp Oakland, MD]. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland,_Maryland Oakland, MD wikipedia]
+
'''EXCERPTED''' from Maryland State court records:  Docket number 1542.23, State of Maryland vs. [[Thomas Reagan]], arraignment, January 28th 2005.  
  
−
'' "Ladies and gentlemen of the court, I hold in my hand a very important document that is highly damaging to the "survivor's" case in this matter. I hold here a document signed by ten of the top leading geneticists in the world after genetic tissue was handed over to them from the "survivors" following their initial recovery. I would like to read a portion of this now for you all... ''
+
Barry Levine[http://www.garrettcounty.org/st-attorney/, *], Assistant State's Attorney, for the Prosecution:
  
−
From Dr. Peter Beighton:  
+
"Your Honor, altough the State has charged Mr. Reagan under Maryland Criminal Code Title 6, subtitle 3, section 01a with 2,000 counts of malicious destriction of private property[http://198.187.128.12/maryland/lpext.dll/Infobase/153ca/16439/16541/16542?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_cr6-301, *], under Title 7, subtitle 1, section 05b with 2,000 counts of motor vehicle theft[http://198.187.128.12/maryland/lpext.dll/Infobase/153ca/16667/16695/16739?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_cr7-105, *] and under Title 9, subtitle 7, section 02a with 500 counts of injury to public property[http://198.187.128.12/maryland/lpext.dll/Infobase/153ca/16d8f/17014/1702b?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_cr9-702, *], the State's sole reason for these charges was to bring Mr. Reagan before this court today so that we could assert that he has no right to a trial at all." <br>  "Thomas Reagan is of the group known to the media and the world at large as The Survivors.  It is the State's contention that these so-called Survivors are no longer human.  I hold here a document, ''A Mutation in the Variable Repeat Region of the Gene'', by Lindsay Gleghorn, Rajkumar Ramesar and Gillian Wallis, 3 of the world's leading genetic specialists.  The report is further signed and approved by 7 more.  They arrived at the conclusions in this report after examining the Survivors' genetic tissue.  Let me read a brief excerpt:  <blockquote>The genetic makeup of these subjects, I say subjects because their DNA no longer even remotely resembles human DNA, is unlike anything I have ever seen. If I were given this DNA without knowledge of the source of it I would not even assume that they were human.</blockquote>  "Would not even assume that they were human.  If the world's leading doctors wouldn't identify them as human, how can this court?  And if they are not human, how can we give them the same basic rights as humans?  When a tiger kills a man, do we put it on trial?  No. We put it down, to stop it from killing again."  <br>  "Your honor, there are tigers in our midst, and it would only hurt us to pretend that they are men."
−
"The genetic makeup of these subjects, I say subjects because their DNA no longer even remotely resembles human DNA, is unlike anything I have ever seen. If I were given this DNA without knowledge of the source of it I would not even assume that they were human."  
 
−
 
 
−
'''Webster's dictionary states the definition of human as:'''
 
−
* Human : Pronunciation: 'hyü-m&n, 'yü-
 
−
 
 
−
Function: adjective
 
−
 
 
−
1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of humans <the vulnerability of the human body> <human chorionic gonadotropin> <human growth hormone> b : primarily or usually harbored by, affecting, or attacking humans <human appendicitis> <the common human flea>
 
−
 
 
−
The "survivors" show major non-human charictaristics, their bodies are not vulnerable to the same things as humans as already demonstrated.  
 
−
 
 
−
3 : consisting of members of the family Hominidae : HOMINID —hu•man•ness /-m&n-n&s/ noun
 
−
 
 
−
And the definition of Hominidae is...
 
−
 
 
−
* hom•i•nid : Pronunciation: 'häm-&-n&d, -"nid Function: noun
 
−
 
 
−
: any bipedal primate mammal of the family Hominidae —hominid adjective
 
−
 
 
−
''Some of these poor beings are not even mammals anymore... Therefore we state that these people are not in fact humans, and as such are not privvy to the basic human rights and also have no right to challenge the wisdom of the united states govornment."''
 
−
 
 
−
'''Report Bibliography''': ''A Mutation in the Variable Repeat Region of the Gene'' - 
 
−
Lindsay Gleghorn, Rajkumar Ramesar, and Gillian Wallis
 
  
 
[[State vs. Reagan - Additional Details]]
 
[[State vs. Reagan - Additional Details]]
Line 123: Line 39:
 
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime Crimes Defined on Wikipedia]
 
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime Crimes Defined on Wikipedia]
 
* [http://www.georgiacriminaldefense.com/crimes/violent.htm Georgia Criminal Defense]
 
* [http://www.georgiacriminaldefense.com/crimes/violent.htm Georgia Criminal Defense]
 +
 +
 +
==Virginia State Divorce Law==
 +
* Divorce-Related Websites
 +
** [http://www.divorcenet.com/states/virginia/va_div Divorce.net - Virginia Law]
 +
** [http://www.divorcenet.com/states/virginia/va_divorce Divorce.net - Virginia Law, Summary]
 +
** [http://www.divorcelawinfo.com/VA/divorce/divexpln.htm Divorce Law Info]
 +
** [http://www.vsb.org/publications/brochure/divorce.html VSB - Divorce in Virginia]
 +
** Custody Articles
 +
*** [http://www.divorcelawinfo.com/VA/custody/custody.htm At Divorce Law Info]
 +
*** [http://www.divorcenet.com/states/virginia/criteria_for_deciding_a_virginia_custody_case At Divorce.net]
 +
 +
* Daniel can file for Divorce From Bed and Board (''a mensa et thoro'' - similar to "Legal Seperation" in other states) or Divorce From the Bond of Matrimony (''a vinculo matrimonii'' - also called "a full divorce").
 +
** From Bed and Board: Daniel files on the grounds of Willful Desertion or Abandonment.  The divorce isn't permanent (they can later cancel it), doesn't allow either Daniel or Julie to remarry and keeps joint property & insurance claims valid.  It only legally establishes that they're living apart, custody  of the children and for support (i.e. alimony & child support).
 +
*** Daniel could be the one to do the Deserting.  He would have to move out of the house (though, in ''theory'' he could kick Julie out, instead), but he can then apply for Divorce From Bed and Board right away.  After a year appart he could apply for the court to "merge" that decree into a Divorce From the Bond of Matrimony, if he wanted.
 +
** From the Bond of Matrimony: Daniel files on the grounds of Seperation.  The divorce will be absolute, allowing Daniel & Julie to remarry and terminating all property and insurance claims each has on the other.  Child custody and support are, of course, settled as well.
 +
** Julie has two possibilities for Contesting the Divorce:
 +
*** The Seperation/Desertion wasn't willful (i.e. she didn't plan to leave, she had no choice).  If Daniel applies for divorce on grounds that ''he'' is the one doing the abandonning, Julie can't contest in this way.
 +
*** If she had sex with him since the Survivors woke up, there's no grounds for Julie's Seperation/Desertion.  Again, if Daniel's abandoning, Julie can't contest this way.
 +
* Custody can go either way:
 +
** No preference is given to a parent based on gender.
 +
** Daniel is a better provider, as he works a nicely-paid, full-time job.  By contrast Julie is unemployed.  (Does Julie have job skills?  Can she get a job quickly?)
 +
** Conversely, Daniel's work requires that he spend a lot of time out-of-country and can't, therefore, reliably and consistently care for the children.  Julie can.
 +
** The Court favors the primary caregiver.  That's pretty obviously Julie.
 +
** The Court will consider Daniel's abuse of Julie, but only if it has been previously documented in police reports.
 +
** The parent doing the abandoning is at a disadvantage for custody.
 +
** Three types of custody:
 +
*** Sole Custody: One parent gets custody of both children, who live only with her, and can make all legal decisions for them.  The other parent almost always has visitation rights.
 +
*** Split Custody: The parents each get Sole Custody of one child.  The other parent almost always has visitation rights to their non-custodial child.
 +
*** Joint Custody: The parents share legal decision-making rights for the children and the children spend an equal time with each parent.  A number of different arrangements within this schema is possible.  A very unlikely custody result; usually only happens during amicable divorces where the parents can agree on custody terms prior to court interference.
 +
 +
 +
==FAA Regulations==
 +
Strictly speaking, there are no [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14tab_02.tpl FAA regulations] that apply to Survivors with the ability to fly.  This is because all of the definitions [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=79d8b0163257ddfb862decdb2fa8a82f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14cfrv1_02.tpl (Title 14:1.1)] of aircraft cover only constructed objects and, even then, of a weight heavier than any human being.
 +
 +
More broadly, certain FAA regulations can be interpreted as applying to the Survivors.  Most notably, these are:
 +
* [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=aa2c1591c256d4f3674509bdf98167ab&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.14&idno=14#14:2.0.1.3.14.1.9.6Title '''Title 14:99.11], ADIZ flight plan requirements''' <br> This rule specifies that an aircraft has to file a pre-departure flight plan with local Air Traffic Control, giving such information as type of aircraft, pilot's name and address, proposed flight path and time, etc.
 +
* [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=5e139e6c909c484acb4f9e831205b188&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.2.6&idno=14 '''Title 14:71.31-71], Class A-E Airspace Areas''' <br> These rules specify that aircraft travelling in Class A or B airspace (above a major airport or between an 18,000 and 60,000 foot altitude) must maintain radio contact with local Air Traffic Control.  This is the rule cited by FAA Administrator Marion Blakely in her [[FAA Letter|letter to Brian Jaffe]].
 +
* [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=5e139e6c909c484acb4f9e831205b188&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.1.2&idno=14 '''Title 14:61.1-431], Certification for Pilots''' <br> As above, Survivors do not count as aircraft under the current rules and cannot register as such since there is no way to measure their air-worthiness.  The FAA could, however, decide that, as  they are people, they do count as aircraft operators and could require them to pass standard piloting tests in order to legally exert their powers.
 +
** The FAA could, instead, determine that as no Survivor qualifies as aircraft, no Survivor is allowed to use their power to fly, legally grounding all Survivors.
 +
* [http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=5e139e6c909c484acb4f9e831205b188&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.2.7&idno=14 '''Title 14:73.1-85], Special Use and Restricted Airspace''' <br> Some airspace, notably over important government sites, is prohibited for civilian air traffic.  A Survivor found flying through this airspace could be fined or jailed as per current FAA regulations.
  
  

Latest revision as of 00:48, 8 January 2006

The Patriot Act[edit]

Praised by some, criticised by others, the USA Patriot Act is one of the defining pieces of legislation from the days following September 11th, 2001. Seen by most as an "anti-terrorism" law, the Patriot Act's purpose is largely to expand law-enforcement powers to keep up with advancing technology. Simply put: if the authorities were formerly able to seize your mail or faxes, or were able to wiretap you, once they had a warrant, they can now also (with a warrant) seize your voicemails and email and chat logs and such. The act also includes a string of commands for intelligence agencies to do their jobs better - to share information with each other, to hire more translators, etc.

The full text of the Patriot Act can be found here. That said, the intricacies of government legal jargon are not the easiest things to understand. See commentaries from the slate.com and the aclu. Also see The Patriot Act For Dummies.

Changes in Section 412[edit]

The Patriot Act in the world of the American Gods game contains one key difference from the one in the real world. This difference appears in Section 412, MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW.

The Section discusses the rules under which the Attorney General may take suspected terrorists into custody. The differences appear in three paragraphs, quoted below (the differences appear in italics):

  • (1) CUSTODY - the Attorney General shall take into custody any alien who is certified under paragraph (3) and any deceased bodies and organic materials involved in acts certified aliens engaged in to so certify them.
  • (2) RELEASE- Except as provided in paragraphs (5) and (6), the Attorney General shall maintain custody of such an alien or alien material until the alien is removed from the United States. Except as provided in paragraph (6), such custody shall be maintained irrespective of any relief from removal for which the alien or alien material may be eligible, or any relief from removal granted the alien, until the Attorney General determines that the alien is no longer an alien who may be certified under paragraph (3). If the alien is finally determined not to be removable, detention pursuant to this subsection shall terminate.
  • (3) CERTIFICATION - The Attorney General may certify an alien under this paragraph if the Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe that the alien -
    • (A) is described in section 212(a)(3)(A)(i), 212(a)(3)(A)(iii), 212(a)(3)(B), 237(a)(4)(A)(i), 237(a)(4)(A)(iii), or 237(a)(4)(B); or
    • (B) is engaged in any other activity that endangers the national security of the United States.
    • (C) is declared deceased, upon declaration all organic material becomes materials in accordance with 213.


State vs. Reagan[edit]

EXCERPTED from Maryland State court records: Docket number 1542.23, State of Maryland vs. Thomas Reagan, arraignment, January 28th 2005.

Barry Levine*, Assistant State's Attorney, for the Prosecution:

"Your Honor, altough the State has charged Mr. Reagan under Maryland Criminal Code Title 6, subtitle 3, section 01a with 2,000 counts of malicious destriction of private property*, under Title 7, subtitle 1, section 05b with 2,000 counts of motor vehicle theft* and under Title 9, subtitle 7, section 02a with 500 counts of injury to public property*, the State's sole reason for these charges was to bring Mr. Reagan before this court today so that we could assert that he has no right to a trial at all."
"Thomas Reagan is of the group known to the media and the world at large as The Survivors. It is the State's contention that these so-called Survivors are no longer human. I hold here a document, A Mutation in the Variable Repeat Region of the Gene, by Lindsay Gleghorn, Rajkumar Ramesar and Gillian Wallis, 3 of the world's leading genetic specialists. The report is further signed and approved by 7 more. They arrived at the conclusions in this report after examining the Survivors' genetic tissue. Let me read a brief excerpt:

The genetic makeup of these subjects, I say subjects because their DNA no longer even remotely resembles human DNA, is unlike anything I have ever seen. If I were given this DNA without knowledge of the source of it I would not even assume that they were human.

"Would not even assume that they were human. If the world's leading doctors wouldn't identify them as human, how can this court? And if they are not human, how can we give them the same basic rights as humans? When a tiger kills a man, do we put it on trial? No. We put it down, to stop it from killing again."
"Your honor, there are tigers in our midst, and it would only hurt us to pretend that they are men."

State vs. Reagan - Additional Details


Homicide and the Legal System[edit]

References


Virginia State Divorce Law[edit]

  • Daniel can file for Divorce From Bed and Board (a mensa et thoro - similar to "Legal Seperation" in other states) or Divorce From the Bond of Matrimony (a vinculo matrimonii - also called "a full divorce").
    • From Bed and Board: Daniel files on the grounds of Willful Desertion or Abandonment. The divorce isn't permanent (they can later cancel it), doesn't allow either Daniel or Julie to remarry and keeps joint property & insurance claims valid. It only legally establishes that they're living apart, custody of the children and for support (i.e. alimony & child support).
      • Daniel could be the one to do the Deserting. He would have to move out of the house (though, in theory he could kick Julie out, instead), but he can then apply for Divorce From Bed and Board right away. After a year appart he could apply for the court to "merge" that decree into a Divorce From the Bond of Matrimony, if he wanted.
    • From the Bond of Matrimony: Daniel files on the grounds of Seperation. The divorce will be absolute, allowing Daniel & Julie to remarry and terminating all property and insurance claims each has on the other. Child custody and support are, of course, settled as well.
    • Julie has two possibilities for Contesting the Divorce:
      • The Seperation/Desertion wasn't willful (i.e. she didn't plan to leave, she had no choice). If Daniel applies for divorce on grounds that he is the one doing the abandonning, Julie can't contest in this way.
      • If she had sex with him since the Survivors woke up, there's no grounds for Julie's Seperation/Desertion. Again, if Daniel's abandoning, Julie can't contest this way.
  • Custody can go either way:
    • No preference is given to a parent based on gender.
    • Daniel is a better provider, as he works a nicely-paid, full-time job. By contrast Julie is unemployed. (Does Julie have job skills? Can she get a job quickly?)
    • Conversely, Daniel's work requires that he spend a lot of time out-of-country and can't, therefore, reliably and consistently care for the children. Julie can.
    • The Court favors the primary caregiver. That's pretty obviously Julie.
    • The Court will consider Daniel's abuse of Julie, but only if it has been previously documented in police reports.
    • The parent doing the abandoning is at a disadvantage for custody.
    • Three types of custody:
      • Sole Custody: One parent gets custody of both children, who live only with her, and can make all legal decisions for them. The other parent almost always has visitation rights.
      • Split Custody: The parents each get Sole Custody of one child. The other parent almost always has visitation rights to their non-custodial child.
      • Joint Custody: The parents share legal decision-making rights for the children and the children spend an equal time with each parent. A number of different arrangements within this schema is possible. A very unlikely custody result; usually only happens during amicable divorces where the parents can agree on custody terms prior to court interference.


FAA Regulations[edit]

Strictly speaking, there are no FAA regulations that apply to Survivors with the ability to fly. This is because all of the definitions (Title 14:1.1) of aircraft cover only constructed objects and, even then, of a weight heavier than any human being.

More broadly, certain FAA regulations can be interpreted as applying to the Survivors. Most notably, these are:

  • Title 14:99.11, ADIZ flight plan requirements
    This rule specifies that an aircraft has to file a pre-departure flight plan with local Air Traffic Control, giving such information as type of aircraft, pilot's name and address, proposed flight path and time, etc.
  • Title 14:71.31-71, Class A-E Airspace Areas
    These rules specify that aircraft travelling in Class A or B airspace (above a major airport or between an 18,000 and 60,000 foot altitude) must maintain radio contact with local Air Traffic Control. This is the rule cited by FAA Administrator Marion Blakely in her letter to Brian Jaffe.
  • Title 14:61.1-431, Certification for Pilots
    As above, Survivors do not count as aircraft under the current rules and cannot register as such since there is no way to measure their air-worthiness. The FAA could, however, decide that, as they are people, they do count as aircraft operators and could require them to pass standard piloting tests in order to legally exert their powers.
    • The FAA could, instead, determine that as no Survivor qualifies as aircraft, no Survivor is allowed to use their power to fly, legally grounding all Survivors.
  • Title 14:73.1-85, Special Use and Restricted Airspace
    Some airspace, notably over important government sites, is prohibited for civilian air traffic. A Survivor found flying through this airspace could be fined or jailed as per current FAA regulations.


The AMERICAN GODS

Retrieved from "https://wiki.rpg.net/index.php?title=Legal_Matters&oldid=16314"