[SOP Workgroup] Article 2 - Corporate Law

[funkycmm]

This is a separated PR from the SOP Workgroup containing the design document and contents of Article 2 of the NCLR.

[ferynn]

Searches

The search could lead to the seizure of the objects in a person's backpack, hands, coat, belt, pockets, headset, and hat. This includes any bags, boxes or other containers the person has in the immediate vicinity.

Don't define searches in terms of item slots. It leads to weird cases. Just define in terms of personal possessions, containers, etc.

Confiscation

Removal of body augmentation contraband should be done by medical personnel and not cause excessive harm or leave the person's body nonfunctional.

Depends on what the augmentation is tbh

---

Departmental Searches:

There is a search warrant signed by the appropriate Department Head, Head of Personnel or Captain

Change appropriate to corresponding

Security personnel should minimize the interruption of work from the department
Personnel should be able to work

Need to be careful on this. Adding language like 'reasonable accommodations" made for work.

Secure Areas are not be searched unless otherwise EXPLICITLY authorized by the head of that department, or higher

What is the definition of secure?

Anything, excluding personnel, within the areas defined on the searched warrant can be searched. This includes but is not limited to:

• Crates
• Lockers
• Machines
• Plants

You don't need to list any of these. Examples are unneeded. It's also meta to list plants.

The Head of Personnel may issue ID’s with temporary access for the purposes of fulfilling a search warrant.

Does the HOP still exist in this framework?

---

Detainments and Arrests:

List reasons for probable cause in a more general spot. It's referenced in other sections

Cuffing of a detainee or arrestee should only happen if:

1. The subject poses a clear threat towards:

• Command staff
• Security officers
• Station assets

2. The subject is non-cooperative, or resisting enforcement authority.

It shouldn't be that both are required. Otherwise someone with a gun could keep it out as they're walked to sec.

---

Chain of Custody:

What is "Enforcement Personnel"?

Thoughts per numbered point

1. Some nice flavor aspects, but difficult to do with typing being a thing. They can't shout and act at the same time in most cases. This should be ignored if the subject isn't cooperating, like running.
2. Seems fine.
3. Sure
4. This is iffy if there's a bunch of very dangerous contraband on a dead person imo. If they're alive sure, but if they're dead, there's not exactly a rush to get them to medical. They just can't be left to rot.
5. I feel like this shouldn't be optional. Why would dangerous contraband ever be brought to a trial?
6. Alright
7. Sure.
8. Sure.
9. This should happen before the trial. Contraband needs to be found and noted before the trial, so it can be brought into context. Also to stop a prisoner from suicide bombing the judge.

Would recommend letting the accused stay in the brig to let a lawyer or similar gather evidence for them, in the case of serious trials. Where that time they spend doesn't count towards sentenced time, but gives them the option to fight a bit more if they have a case.

---

Treatment of Arrestees and Prisoners:

Seems okay

---

Implantation:

We should formalize that sec can implant trackers in the case of prisoners that show clear tracking risks. It's a policy that exists already, but hasn't been written down.

---

Crime Tiers first:

Demotion as a punishment is a little awkward to add, given the department head's firing ability. But if it's clear that this is just an alternative way to force a firing it could be okay. It just shouldn't be argued that they have as right to keep their job if it's not sentenced as such, if the department head wants to fire them anyway.

Misdemeanor's having a 10-15 jail window is a strange bound.

Does this imply no more crime stacking? Can multiple misdemeanors rise to a felony? Are there increased penalties for repeat offenders? What about the attempted/conspiracy/aiding type modifiers that currently exist in space law? This section is a bit unrefined for my tastes currently. Needs elaboration.

---

Crimes:

Damn that's a lot of crimes. I'm just going to type thoughts as I read.

Keeping crime groupings is a bit strange, as it seems like crime stacking doesn't exist anymore?

Sabotage doesn't sound more severe than Mass Destruction as a crime.

Refusal to identify feels redundant with failure to comply on the books.

Hiding your true identity and posing as Central Command, including CCVIP staff

I see that CCVIP snuck in there. I seeeee you. That shouldn't be in Impersonation of Central Command.

Perjury shouldn't include lying to sec imo.

Subversion of court shouldn't be a capital offense.

Capital negligence no longer counts getting people killed as a qualifer. I'm neutral on that, but noting it.

Operation without a permit: What permits? Where do they come from?

Grand theft: What sort of jobs are we talking? Stealing a botanist's tool probably shouldn't be grand theft.

Slander/Libel/Sedition: I'm not opposed to some of these things, but them only being in the context of Central Command is a bit odd

Incapacitation feels like crime bloat

Mutilation also feels like crime bloat

Consensual cannibalism is legal?

Failure to pay a fine: I feel like fines should be autodeducted, and then you can appeal for the deduction to be undone later. Script functions should be as mechanically mediated as possible, so they flow.

Bribery: Shouldn't be command exclusive

Tax Evasion: I'm skeptical of this as a workable crime

Breach of NT Contract: There are no official contracts

---

Contraband reworks are a good idea, though we'd need to examine this in more detail. I think everyone agrees the default setup is bad.

---

Legal Exemptions:

While the idea of having differing enforcement for different types of people has merit, I think this method is a little clunky. I don't think we should have to write out that it's not illegal for security to have their gear. It's implied. I'd recommend reworking this category.

Clown exception should absolutely not be written into space law. Their SOP exemption to consequences for minor funny jokes is very different from saying they are unprosecutable for certain types of crimes. As example, the way this is written allows clowns to legally slip and pie spam security officers trying to arrest a murderer.

[ferynn]

As I kept looking, I saw that article 5 has details on crime stacking and other sentencing related things. Some of what I was questioning about was answered there.

Sentencing seems like a mix of overly simplified and overly complex. All crimes are squished into 4 tiers with defined sentence setups, but there are like 15 modifiers to consider.

Seems a bit like these systems are working against each other