On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Zefram wrote: > I have a problem with your criterion for the defence. It appears to make > ignorance of the law an excuse, even wilful ignorance. Agoran law is not > very large, and I think it is reasonable to require that everyone subject > to it be aware of all relevant parts, other than the rare situations > where we're *all* mistaken as to what the law is.
There's some specific standards set around the old version of this defense in CFJs 1408 and 1424 (although these are specific to officers, who might be expected to meet higher standards of rules knowledge than the hoi polloi). In CFJ 1408, even all of us being mistaken didn't get the officer off the hook. -Goethe
