On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydin<ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > Here, there's a consensus is no dinging at less than 4 days, dinging > after 7 days, but there's probably very few/no cases raised one way or > the other in the 5-7 day range. The question is, is this because we > don't punish, or because officers understand the expectation and have > generally performed well in that range? If the latter then the > punishment is justified; if there's no evidence whatsoever then (in > punishment standards rather than guilt) it's the current judge should be > given the deference determining the first precedent as long as it's not > arbitrary and capricious (the decision, on reading, seems well-reasoned).
I could find no criminal CFJs against officers for late reports during their first week in the archive. However, there were 2 cases (CFJ 2348, CFJ 2379) where the holder of a low-priority office was accused of failing to report during eir first month in the office; both resulted in SILENCE. The first involved the holder being in office for 15 days in the month (although it was December, so many of these days were during the Holiday) and the second 11 days. Of course, you can look at these number 2 ways; either that these are > 7 days or that they're less than half the reporting period and would translate to a 2-3 day period for a high-priority office.
