[TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (29 Nov 2023 21:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Evyn MacDude (29 Nov 2023 22:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jeff Zeitlin (30 Nov 2023 00:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers David Johnson (29 Nov 2023 23:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alex Goodwin (30 Nov 2023 04:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (30 Nov 2023 16:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alex Goodwin (30 Nov 2023 17:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Evyn MacDude (30 Nov 2023 20:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Ian Whitchurch (30 Nov 2023 20:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jeffrey Schwartz (30 Nov 2023 16:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alan Peery (30 Nov 2023 19:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (30 Nov 2023 20:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Phill (30 Nov 2023 21:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (30 Nov 2023 22:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alex Goodwin (01 Dec 2023 05:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alan Peery (01 Dec 2023 10:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Ian Whitchurch (03 Dec 2023 05:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (04 Dec 2023 02:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (07 Dec 2023 18:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (07 Dec 2023 20:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers NotKnown AtThisAddress (08 Dec 2023 12:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (08 Dec 2023 16:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Jim Vassilakos (09 Dec 2023 18:35 UTC)

Re: [TML] Arresting Naval Officers Alex Goodwin 30 Nov 2023 17:23 UTC

On 1/12/23 02:36, Jim Vassilakos - jim.vassilakos at gmail.com (via tml
list) wrote:
> I agree with Alex. Locals should be able to arrest and even
> temporarily detain (but NOT incarcerate NOR prosecute) Imperial Navy
> personnel outside the extraterritoriality zone. That's the assumption
> I was running with. Granted, I could see the local Imperial Admiral
> (or whoever is the highest ranking officer) invoking some special
> right (Section 678) in order to protect Imperial interests from local
> law enforcement & politicians, and I could even see the Admiral
> punishing the locals for anti-Imperial activities, including the
> overuse of force against Navy personnel, but for a mere captain to do
> this when there are higher ranking Navy authorities in-system seems a
> bit much. I'm going to have to think about it, but I imagine it would
> be a bad look for everyone involved, and both sides of the
> confrontation might end up getting disciplined by their respective
> superiors. Let me know what you all think.
>

Jim,

Glad to hear us mob (and some wombat) helped you think the situation
thru and come to a workable conclusion.

As always, depends on circumstance (and what sort of curveballs you can
lob at your players).

To address the other side of my argument, I would take the tack that an
Imperial high noble _within their demesne_ functions as HIM's viceroy
and their persons are thus sacrosanct from the locals _in pursuit of
their official duties_.

Locals not wishing to brass the local bits of the 3I off would be wise
to leave said noble in pursuit of their duties un-arrested, lest the 3I
construe the physical assault implicit in the arrest as high treason
_against the 3I_ and put the boot in accordingly.  Bodyguard huscarles
escorting their patron (deliberately kept rubbery, in MTU that even
_have_ a 3rd Imperium) would likewise inherit their patron's immunities.

Likewise, a wise(-ish) high noble has a good idea of how _far_ they can
push things.  The locals can always appeal to that noble's feudal
superior if the noble in question overcooks it.

Alex