Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Sean Hunt wrote: >> I called a high-II criminal case covering this very issue but with a >> shorter period. The fact is that game custom doesn't take precedent over >> the rules; while I actually proposed reinserting such an exception as >> part of a larger rework of offices, that does not change the rule as it >> stands. It is a possible exception that the rule actually only binds >> someone who's held the office for the entire period of the duty, but >> other than that, there is no means by which failing to perform that duty >> is legal (and thinking you would be excused is not the same as thinking >> your action was legal, so the lack of knowledge of the crime does not >> apply). > > You're right, I should have clarified I was suggesting that it was > possible grounds for DISCHARGE rather than not guilty, that's the only > place for custom to enter. However, I'd say that "I didn't know the > election results were announced and I was the winner" is reasonable for > at least a w/o objection period under a R1504(d) Not Guilty. > > -G.
I agree. Not having enough time is not a defense for offices with II>=2, as they are actually supposed to publish inaccurate reports rather than be late (odd, I know). It could be a valid defense under (e), however, for an II=1 office. -coppro
