CRIMES AND LAW VIOLATIONS IN THE NEW DSMN SYSTEM
Subtle aspects for crime scenes
There are cases when, for example, a body or a crime scene is found outside cities, towns and villages (somewhere in the wilderness, for example) and then the question arises, who will be responsible for the discovery and who will have to initiate the investigation?
As always, everything is quite simple: for example, some forester discovered the crime scene, then he turns to his autonomy and transmits information about the discovery to a third-order executive (Judge) of his autonomy. If a homeless person has found it, they can contact any nearby autonomy. Then third-order executive (Judge) looks at the map for the five closest autonomies to the location (perhaps his autonomy will fall into this category, which is ok), then he reports the situation to these five third-order executives (Judges) and they, in turn, agree among themselves. Each of them allocates at least one policeman to assist the investigation, to travel to the place of criminal discovery, together they select a detective and appoint an investigation.
If the investigation has not yielded results (dead-end investigation), then the case is sent to the archive. If it has been possible to identify any possible people involved in crime or law violation, then the search for these people begins, their identities and places of residence are established. And then everything is standard, if the person (suspect) is found, his autonomy is established (if he is not homeless), then after a full investigation, a jury and a court are appointed.
Mass brawls
There are cases of mass brawls. If this happens, then the third-order executive (Judge) of the autonomy where the mass brawl is taking place, or several third-order executives (Judges) on the border of the autonomies (if there is a mass brawl here and there), in which all this is happening, request help from the special police forces (SORT, SRT, SPF, SWAT, special police squad and so on), indicating to them how many people are fighting and how much effort should be allocated to eliminate the disorder.
Then the special police forces arrive and stop the brawl. If suddenly attacks occur even on special police forces, then such brawlers are necessarily dragged out of the crowd and sent to a paddy wagon, and then to a special holding cells at the special police forces building. This is a separate building in a locality and is subordinate only to the management of this special police forces. If it was not possible to get them out of the crowd, then they are wanted.
One way or another, those brawlers who was found or placed to a special holding cells at the special police forces building interrogated, their identity is established, established the autonomy in which they live, and proceedings begin between the autonomies of the injured policeman from the special police forces and the person who attacked him and who participated in that brawl.
Since the special police forces are carrying out the task and their actions can sometimes be quite harsh, but necessary to ensure order on the street, they will be seriously lenient in court.
How it will manifest itself: instead of the usual proceedings between citizens in an incomprehensible situation, when four jurors from each side and one random ninth juror from any autonomy that is not related to the proceedings. Everything will be a little different in favor of the special police forces, namely: on the part of the special police forces, in such a situation there will be four jurors. Two more jurors will be randomly selected from any DIFFERENT autonomies that the injured special forces policeman wants besides his own autonomy.
This results in four jurors from the injured party, two random jurors from any two autonomies that the special forces policeman chose himself, two from the attacker's side and one completely independent juror. There are only nine jurors.
It turns out that the injured special forces policeman is in a more advantageous situation, as he defended order on the street. And if it becomes obvious that he is not guilty, but only answered and acted out of necessity (which will also be decided by the most independent jurors), then he will most likely be recognized as a victim, since all those independent jurors may need his help at any moment and they are interested in this.
But if jurors consider that his actions were disproportionate or too harsh, then he may be dismissed from the special police forces and dismissed with consequences for his family, as already described above, in the cases of various executives. Or even he may be punished with imprisonment. But he have to be a real crazy man, being bats if he smashing the faces of the participants of the brawl just because he wanted to do so.
In 99% of cases, if a person is assigned to protect order on the street and this will be clearly visible on the same cameras or/and interviews with witnesses (if necessary using a polygraph), then the jury formed in the way described above, of course will side with the defender of order and this is correct and logical.
