The trial of Eiric S. Börnatfiglheu came to an end this past week, as the fraudster received a sentence of fifteen years of civil disability, five hundred hours of community service, a lengthy probation, and a $1 00 USD fine. The sentence levied on S:reu Börnatfiglheu (who had pled guilty) by Magistrate Txec dal Nordselva was unprecedented in its scope, simultaneously more lenient than any previous criminal sentence, since it did not immediately strip the accused of his citizenship, the most common sentence, and more harsh than any previous sentence, since it included a substantial monetary fine and a large amount of service. The magistrate stated sternly that "[t]here is little doubt that the trust placed in S:reu Kildow by the nation was shattered, perhaps irreparably, when it was revealed the sheer magnitude of his crimes against the Kingdom. The Court is not lacking in mercy but it also understands that an example must be set." The final summary of the charges were seventeen counts of violation of 36RZ1 0 (fraudulent immigration and creation of a fake personality) and fifteen counts of violation of 947.01 25 of the Criminal Codes of Wisconsin (harassing, abusing, and/or annoying others with false online identities).
Under the terms of his probation, S:reu Börnatfiglheu does still stand to lose his citizenship if he is convicted of any other crime or fails to complete the other terms of his sentence, but many observers of Talossa's justice system may have been surprised to see someone convicted of a total of thirty-two criminal counts remain a Talossan. The reaction to the sentence, however, was generally positive: the magistrate managed to appease those who wanted a harsh example and those who wanted proof that the courts could do more than simply expel accused criminals.
One aspect of the case remains unresolved; during the course of the proceedings the Chancery challenged an injunction issued by the court, arguing mainly over issues of procedure. While the court overruled the Chancery and issued the injunction, the Chancery has stated that they intend to appeal the ruling.