-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
((Sure. Consider all members of the Council, excluding the accused and accuser, as mutual judges. They may all question both sides as much as they please.))
I'd like to being with by stating the obvious. Of course, as a Represent of the Bank of Tuscany in Aragon, I represent the interests of that bank when it comes to the banking business. It is public knowledge that I have been working for the Bank of Tuscany for years and the Crown has been aware from this since the very beginning. Working as a banker is not a crime.
Cardinal Modena claims that I am harming Aragon through "sedition by monopolizing Aragon's economy." Aragon should be happy and thankful that the Bank of Tuscany has invested in the Aragonese economy. The Bank of Tuscany's presence in Aragon has created two influential trading companies, one of them even has a monopoly in Brazil. Epecially the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company benefits the Crown because the Crown receives the majority of the shares.
I don't know why we are discussing trading companies, banking and in particular the Bank of Tuscany's loan practice
The fact that one of the characters allows sects of Christianity as members does not concern the Bank of Tuscany. We provide the loan. What the person does with the loan is completely up to them. Privacy is important in the banking business.
Cardinal Modena complains that members of the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company may follow any Christian faith. As far as I am aware, this includes Catholics and Orthodox but not Jews. Yet, you, and the Crown are fully aware that 60% of their profits go to the Crown. It's none of my business what members the Balkan Trading Company allows. I am not the founder of said company. I suggest you ask Aedan O'Connery why Orthodox are allowed in his trading company.
If Cardinal Modena believe that the Balkan Trading Company is tolerating Jews as members then I suggest he better brings some proof to the table. Right now it is just pure speculation on his part. Cardinal Modena should also explain how lending the Balkan Iberian Trading Company money makes me a traitor.
Cardinal Modena claims that I have"consciously or unconsciously" aided Portugal. What makes Cardinal Modena believe that the Bank of Tuscany in Porto has funded wars in Portugal? Has he provided evidence for these once again false accusations? The answer is simple. He hasn't. On top of that, I am in no way responsible for what the Bank of Tuscany in Porto is doing.
Cardinal Modena is accusing me of "potential bribery". Where are the facts? Where is the hard evidence? Oh, there is not any. Cardinal Modena's whole case is built on speculation, accusation and lacks any sort of proof that would make ma traitor.
Cardinal Modena is not only accusing me of "potential bribery" but also the Atlantic Trading Company. I say, enough with those false accusations. The Cardinal had enough time to deliver evidence and he has failed to do so.
Cardinal Modena has delivered no evidence for any of his accusations.
Cardinal Modena claims that I am harming Aragon through "sedition by monopolizing Aragon's economy." Aragon should be happy and thankful that the Bank of Tuscany has invested in the Aragonese economy. The Bank of Tuscany's presence in Aragon has created two influential trading companies, one of them even has a monopoly in Brazil. Epecially the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company benefits the Crown because the Crown receives the majority of the shares.
I don't know why we are discussing trading companies, banking and in particular the Bank of Tuscany's loan practice
The fact that one of the characters allows sects of Christianity as members does not concern the Bank of Tuscany. We provide the loan. What the person does with the loan is completely up to them. Privacy is important in the banking business.
Cardinal Modena complains that members of the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company may follow any Christian faith. As far as I am aware, this includes Catholics and Orthodox but not Jews. Yet, you, and the Crown are fully aware that 60% of their profits go to the Crown. It's none of my business what members the Balkan Trading Company allows. I am not the founder of said company. I suggest you ask Aedan O'Connery why Orthodox are allowed in his trading company.
If Cardinal Modena believe that the Balkan Trading Company is tolerating Jews as members then I suggest he better brings some proof to the table. Right now it is just pure speculation on his part. Cardinal Modena should also explain how lending the Balkan Iberian Trading Company money makes me a traitor.
Cardinal Modena claims that I have"consciously or unconsciously" aided Portugal. What makes Cardinal Modena believe that the Bank of Tuscany in Porto has funded wars in Portugal? Has he provided evidence for these once again false accusations? The answer is simple. He hasn't. On top of that, I am in no way responsible for what the Bank of Tuscany in Porto is doing.
Cardinal Modena is accusing me of "potential bribery". Where are the facts? Where is the hard evidence? Oh, there is not any. Cardinal Modena's whole case is built on speculation, accusation and lacks any sort of proof that would make ma traitor.
Cardinal Modena is not only accusing me of "potential bribery" but also the Atlantic Trading Company. I say, enough with those false accusations. The Cardinal had enough time to deliver evidence and he has failed to do so.
Cardinal Modena has delivered no evidence for any of his accusations.
((Private))
*Miguel Villanova is utterly confused after receiving the report of the trial of his current employer for the act of treason and... for possibly being a Jew?*
*Miguel Villanova is utterly confused after receiving the report of the trial of his current employer for the act of treason and... for possibly being a Jew?*
((Seeing as I don't want this trial to drag on, all council members, excluding the accuser and accused, may now vote on whether or not delpiero is guilty. That means that @AvatarOfKhaine, @Keinwyn, @05060403, @ThePatriotOfDreumel, and @LordDamien all may vote on this. I will give them until tomorrow at 9am PST to vote, although I may extend it to later in the day. I just want it resolved before I work on the update. Here is the voting template:
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent/Guilty/Abstain
Remember, only the Council ministers listed may vote. From now on, can people refrain from charging each other of crimes. I need to work out a system for this because what we are doing is extremely flawed.))
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent/Guilty/Abstain
Remember, only the Council ministers listed may vote. From now on, can people refrain from charging each other of crimes. I need to work out a system for this because what we are doing is extremely flawed.))
Questioning of Antonio di Arezzo by Armand Sastre. ((jointly written with delpiero. sorry for the length))
Sastre: What exactly is the nature of your role as representative of the Bank of Tuscany?
Antonio: I am responsible for all business transactions conducted by the Bank of Tuscany within the Kingdom of Aragon. The Bank of Tuscany is involved in the banking business, which means we provide loans to those who ask.
Sastre: You possess authority to decide the terms of loans without oversight from anyone else at the Bank?
Antonio: Yes, I possess the authority to make business transactions within the Kingdom of Aragon. This means I am not responsible for any transactions conducted by the Bank of Tuscany in Porto which Cardinal Modena is accusing me of.
Sastre: How does the Bank reward you for your services? A stipend? Shares?
Antonio: I get paid a salary and if I am successful then I get a bonus. This is quite common among bankers of my rank. If I negotiate a good deal for the Bank of Tuscany, then I profit from that.
Sastre: So it is in your direct personal interest to see that your investments on behalf of the bank are successful. Would it be fair to say that the more successful they are the more you are rewarded?
Antonio: Yes, that is the case. However, if a business transaction goes wrong then I am also personally responsible for that. That way the Bank of Tuscany can ensure that our business transactions are mostly successful.
Sastre: You have invested in the ATC on behalf of the Bank of Tuscany?
Antonio: That is only partially correct. The Bank of Tuscany has provided two citizens with loans who asked us to fund a trading company. These are the Atlantic Trading Company and the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company. The Bank of Tuscany has received shares in return.
Sastre: So the Bank possesses shares in the ATC? You will be rewarded for the success of the ATC?
Antonio: Yes.
Sastre: Do you not think therefore that there is something of a conflict of interest when you advise His Majesty on Aragonese trade arrangements?
Antonio: If you are referring to the latest vote regarding Sevilla-
Sastre: No, in general. If you gain personally from your relationship with the Bank, does it not mean that it is not always in your best interest to advise His Majesty honestly? For example regardless of the arguments for and against establishing Sevilla as the staple port, you will gain from this because the ATC will gain and thus the Bank of Tuscany.
Antonio: It is important that you do not forget that I am also Count of Sevilla. So when it comes to my relationship with the ATC then I have a special interest in seeing it flourishing because a successful ATC will bring wealth to the County of Sevilla and -
Sastre: I am aware that it would benefit Sevilla, just as the alternative would benefit the Capital. It is only natural that a Count would stick up for his county. I simply wished to establish that you have a conflict of interest due to your extranational-
Antonio: Where do you see a conflict of interest? I do what is best for my county, if I gain financially then this is a nice side effect. Money is not my only motivation.
Sastre: I do not claim you have a single motivation, merely to establish a certain one.
Moving on. What is the nature of your relationship with Ferdinant de Almeria?
Antonio: Ferdinant II de Almeria is business associate and a loyal citizen of Sevilla. Due to him being head of the ATC, we see each other regularly. Especially, when he delivers the Bank of Tuscany’s shares to my villa. I also see Ferdinant II at events regarding the city like the recent inauguration of -
Sastre: So it is fair to say you know him well on a personal level?
Antonio: To some extent but not that well. I do not know a lot about his family. Our relationship is mostly a business relationship.
Sastre: He was also very vocal in his support for Sevilla as the staple port. So much so that he was willing to send letters Armand produces said letter to nobles such as myself and Cardinal Módena offering shares in the ATC for ‘convincing’. Were you aware of this?
Antonio: If you suggest a bill, then you will be vocal and support it, or not? Do you blame Ferdinant II for supporting his own bill?
Sastre: No. Were you aware of the extent of his efforts as I just outlined?
Antonio: I did not know the details.
Sastre: The details? But you were aware that he was encouraging other members of the court to vote in favour of Sevilla?
Antonio: I was not directly aware that he was encouraging other members of the court but I expected nothing else than his full support for the bill. If the bill would have gone the other way, it would have harmed Sevilla. As count, I can’t allow that to happen.
Sastre: Did you yourself encourage other members of the court to vote in favour?
Antonio: Yes, I asked friends and business associates to support designating Sevilla as staple port. I am an an active count, not a passive one. What would the citizens of Sevilla think if I had done nothing?
Sastre: What was the nature of the conversations and letters you exchanged with these individuals?
Antonio: May I give you an example?
Sastre: You may.
Antonio: I had received a letter from Miguel Villanova who is a colonizing the Falklands in my name. In my reply, I asked him to support the bill in favor of Sevilla. Miguel then changed his vote in favor of Sevilla.
Sastre: You didn’t keep a copy of the letter by any chance?
Antonio: I have.
Sastre: Reads the letter.
Antonio: Do you have any questions concerning the letter?
Sastre: It seems you did not provide any arguments based on the benefits to Aragon. You asked him based on his personal relationship with you as financier of his current project.
Antonio: That is correct. I asked him based on our personal relations. Anything wrong with that?
Sastre: Why then would he change his vote? Previously he seemed to believe that favouring Valencia was preferable. Yet without any arguments to the contrary he switches his vote as a favour to yourself?
Antonio: I suggest you ask Miguel Villanova this question as I cannot speak on his behalf. I can only assume that Villanova was not aware of the consequences the vote would have had for Aragon’s colonial future. You should not forget that Miguel is an uneducated pig farmer.
Sastre: Your letter does not mention consequences for Aragon’s colonial future, only your county.
Antonio: Establishing Sevilla as staple port for colonial goods would have benefited the Kingdom of Aragon.
Sastre: Yes, but your letter does not state this, and yet it was enough to sway Senor Villanova’s vote.
Antonio: All I know is that Miguel Villanova was convinced through my letter to change his vote.
Sastre: I see. Did you write to any other individuals on the subject of the staple port?
Antonio: Yes, I have. My duty as Count of Sevilla is to protect the city from harm.
Sastre: Are you prepared to share this correspondence with the court as well?
Antonio: I still have a copy of the letter I sent to Diego de Bazan.
I’m afraid my servants forgot to make a copy of the letter I sent to the Count of Athens.
Sastre: Reads letter. I see you offer to consult with the crown on his behalf only after the matter of the staple port has been resolved. I presume this is because you were too busy to do so any sooner?
Antonio: That is correct. I simply had no time to deal with that matter, given that it’s not as important. However, I supported Don de Bazan’s claim on Vizcaya. Dealing with his claim on Vizcaya was something I could do with a simple letter whereas the colonial matters would have required too much of my time.
Sastre: I see. This rewarding of loyalty you speak of. Do you have anything to comment on that?
Antonio: Loyalty is important in the world we live in. Antonio di Arezzo does not forget when people are loyal. Wouldn’t you agree?
Sastre: Indeed, loyalty is a rare commodity. However it is questionable that you require someone's loyalty whom you have never met and have just made a generous offer to. I’m sure you can understand that many might consider this a trading of favours of sorts?
Antonio: This is not some sort of trading of favors! You have to start somewhere in order to establish a trustworthy relationship. I believe in Don de Bazan and therefore I supported his claim on the County of Vizcaya.
Sastre: But at this point you had not met Don - now Count - de Bazan? And yet you believed him a suitable Count? At the same time you requested a favor from him?
Antonio: As Diplomat of the Crown, I am well-informed of the political situation in- and outside of the Kingdom. Don de Bazan had served in the army during the revolt in Byzantium and given his noble heritage, I was convinced that he would make a good count.
Furthermore, I’d like to point out that it was not a request. It was a proposal. Don de Bazan was under no obligation to support Sevilla as staple port.
Sastre: Of course not. But loyalty is rewarded. It is a shame that the letter to the Count of Athens has been lost. You provided him with a ship for his son did you not?
Antonio: Yes, I provided Alexandros Kostopoulos’s son with a new ship of Venetian design. I had previously provided the Count of Athens with a ship during the festivities that were held in Athens. Count Kostpoulos gave that ship to his son and we built a friendship during those festivities. When I got my hands on the Venetian ship, I thought of Kostopoulos’s son and provided him with the ship.
Sastre: I see. You wrote to the Count after he expressed his belief that Aragon should concentrate on Mediterranean trade?
Antonio: Yes. Athens is in no way affected by either decision and therefore, I asked him to reconsider his vote.
Sastre: Perhaps Count Kostpoulos can provide some light on this matter? Unlike Senor Villanova, he is not thousands of leagues from court.
---
@LordDamien
My Lord Athens, can you shed some light on why exactly you changed your vote after contact with Antonio di Arezzo?
Sastre: What exactly is the nature of your role as representative of the Bank of Tuscany?
Antonio: I am responsible for all business transactions conducted by the Bank of Tuscany within the Kingdom of Aragon. The Bank of Tuscany is involved in the banking business, which means we provide loans to those who ask.
Sastre: You possess authority to decide the terms of loans without oversight from anyone else at the Bank?
Antonio: Yes, I possess the authority to make business transactions within the Kingdom of Aragon. This means I am not responsible for any transactions conducted by the Bank of Tuscany in Porto which Cardinal Modena is accusing me of.
Sastre: How does the Bank reward you for your services? A stipend? Shares?
Antonio: I get paid a salary and if I am successful then I get a bonus. This is quite common among bankers of my rank. If I negotiate a good deal for the Bank of Tuscany, then I profit from that.
Sastre: So it is in your direct personal interest to see that your investments on behalf of the bank are successful. Would it be fair to say that the more successful they are the more you are rewarded?
Antonio: Yes, that is the case. However, if a business transaction goes wrong then I am also personally responsible for that. That way the Bank of Tuscany can ensure that our business transactions are mostly successful.
Sastre: You have invested in the ATC on behalf of the Bank of Tuscany?
Antonio: That is only partially correct. The Bank of Tuscany has provided two citizens with loans who asked us to fund a trading company. These are the Atlantic Trading Company and the Balkan-Iberian Trading Company. The Bank of Tuscany has received shares in return.
Sastre: So the Bank possesses shares in the ATC? You will be rewarded for the success of the ATC?
Antonio: Yes.
Sastre: Do you not think therefore that there is something of a conflict of interest when you advise His Majesty on Aragonese trade arrangements?
Antonio: If you are referring to the latest vote regarding Sevilla-
Sastre: No, in general. If you gain personally from your relationship with the Bank, does it not mean that it is not always in your best interest to advise His Majesty honestly? For example regardless of the arguments for and against establishing Sevilla as the staple port, you will gain from this because the ATC will gain and thus the Bank of Tuscany.
Antonio: It is important that you do not forget that I am also Count of Sevilla. So when it comes to my relationship with the ATC then I have a special interest in seeing it flourishing because a successful ATC will bring wealth to the County of Sevilla and -
Sastre: I am aware that it would benefit Sevilla, just as the alternative would benefit the Capital. It is only natural that a Count would stick up for his county. I simply wished to establish that you have a conflict of interest due to your extranational-
Antonio: Where do you see a conflict of interest? I do what is best for my county, if I gain financially then this is a nice side effect. Money is not my only motivation.
Sastre: I do not claim you have a single motivation, merely to establish a certain one.
Moving on. What is the nature of your relationship with Ferdinant de Almeria?
Antonio: Ferdinant II de Almeria is business associate and a loyal citizen of Sevilla. Due to him being head of the ATC, we see each other regularly. Especially, when he delivers the Bank of Tuscany’s shares to my villa. I also see Ferdinant II at events regarding the city like the recent inauguration of -
Sastre: So it is fair to say you know him well on a personal level?
Antonio: To some extent but not that well. I do not know a lot about his family. Our relationship is mostly a business relationship.
Sastre: He was also very vocal in his support for Sevilla as the staple port. So much so that he was willing to send letters Armand produces said letter to nobles such as myself and Cardinal Módena offering shares in the ATC for ‘convincing’. Were you aware of this?
Antonio: If you suggest a bill, then you will be vocal and support it, or not? Do you blame Ferdinant II for supporting his own bill?
Sastre: No. Were you aware of the extent of his efforts as I just outlined?
Antonio: I did not know the details.
Sastre: The details? But you were aware that he was encouraging other members of the court to vote in favour of Sevilla?
Antonio: I was not directly aware that he was encouraging other members of the court but I expected nothing else than his full support for the bill. If the bill would have gone the other way, it would have harmed Sevilla. As count, I can’t allow that to happen.
Sastre: Did you yourself encourage other members of the court to vote in favour?
Antonio: Yes, I asked friends and business associates to support designating Sevilla as staple port. I am an an active count, not a passive one. What would the citizens of Sevilla think if I had done nothing?
Sastre: What was the nature of the conversations and letters you exchanged with these individuals?
Antonio: May I give you an example?
Sastre: You may.
Antonio: I had received a letter from Miguel Villanova who is a colonizing the Falklands in my name. In my reply, I asked him to support the bill in favor of Sevilla. Miguel then changed his vote in favor of Sevilla.
Sastre: You didn’t keep a copy of the letter by any chance?
Antonio: I have.
Sastre: Reads the letter.
Antonio: Do you have any questions concerning the letter?
Sastre: It seems you did not provide any arguments based on the benefits to Aragon. You asked him based on his personal relationship with you as financier of his current project.
Antonio: That is correct. I asked him based on our personal relations. Anything wrong with that?
Sastre: Why then would he change his vote? Previously he seemed to believe that favouring Valencia was preferable. Yet without any arguments to the contrary he switches his vote as a favour to yourself?
Antonio: I suggest you ask Miguel Villanova this question as I cannot speak on his behalf. I can only assume that Villanova was not aware of the consequences the vote would have had for Aragon’s colonial future. You should not forget that Miguel is an uneducated pig farmer.
Sastre: Your letter does not mention consequences for Aragon’s colonial future, only your county.
Antonio: Establishing Sevilla as staple port for colonial goods would have benefited the Kingdom of Aragon.
Sastre: Yes, but your letter does not state this, and yet it was enough to sway Senor Villanova’s vote.
Antonio: All I know is that Miguel Villanova was convinced through my letter to change his vote.
Sastre: I see. Did you write to any other individuals on the subject of the staple port?
Antonio: Yes, I have. My duty as Count of Sevilla is to protect the city from harm.
Sastre: Are you prepared to share this correspondence with the court as well?
Antonio: I still have a copy of the letter I sent to Diego de Bazan.
I’m afraid my servants forgot to make a copy of the letter I sent to the Count of Athens.
Sastre: Reads letter. I see you offer to consult with the crown on his behalf only after the matter of the staple port has been resolved. I presume this is because you were too busy to do so any sooner?
Antonio: That is correct. I simply had no time to deal with that matter, given that it’s not as important. However, I supported Don de Bazan’s claim on Vizcaya. Dealing with his claim on Vizcaya was something I could do with a simple letter whereas the colonial matters would have required too much of my time.
Sastre: I see. This rewarding of loyalty you speak of. Do you have anything to comment on that?
Antonio: Loyalty is important in the world we live in. Antonio di Arezzo does not forget when people are loyal. Wouldn’t you agree?
Sastre: Indeed, loyalty is a rare commodity. However it is questionable that you require someone's loyalty whom you have never met and have just made a generous offer to. I’m sure you can understand that many might consider this a trading of favours of sorts?
Antonio: This is not some sort of trading of favors! You have to start somewhere in order to establish a trustworthy relationship. I believe in Don de Bazan and therefore I supported his claim on the County of Vizcaya.
Sastre: But at this point you had not met Don - now Count - de Bazan? And yet you believed him a suitable Count? At the same time you requested a favor from him?
Antonio: As Diplomat of the Crown, I am well-informed of the political situation in- and outside of the Kingdom. Don de Bazan had served in the army during the revolt in Byzantium and given his noble heritage, I was convinced that he would make a good count.
Furthermore, I’d like to point out that it was not a request. It was a proposal. Don de Bazan was under no obligation to support Sevilla as staple port.
Sastre: Of course not. But loyalty is rewarded. It is a shame that the letter to the Count of Athens has been lost. You provided him with a ship for his son did you not?
Antonio: Yes, I provided Alexandros Kostopoulos’s son with a new ship of Venetian design. I had previously provided the Count of Athens with a ship during the festivities that were held in Athens. Count Kostpoulos gave that ship to his son and we built a friendship during those festivities. When I got my hands on the Venetian ship, I thought of Kostopoulos’s son and provided him with the ship.
Sastre: I see. You wrote to the Count after he expressed his belief that Aragon should concentrate on Mediterranean trade?
Antonio: Yes. Athens is in no way affected by either decision and therefore, I asked him to reconsider his vote.
Sastre: Perhaps Count Kostpoulos can provide some light on this matter? Unlike Senor Villanova, he is not thousands of leagues from court.
---
@LordDamien
My Lord Athens, can you shed some light on why exactly you changed your vote after contact with Antonio di Arezzo?
Questions to Lord Kostopoulos. Jointly written with LordDamien.
Sastre: My Lord Athens, can you shed some light on why exactly you changed your vote after contact with Antonio di Arezzo?
Alexandros Kostopoulos “ The reason I changed my vote is because I realized that Antonio had a good point. Europe does not have the money it used to have.. The new world does and he made a good point about that.
Sastre: You don’t happen to have kept a copy of the letter he sent you?
Alexandros Kostopoulos : That letter is private is none of your concern. A private letter is something that will never be shared with anyone else.
Sastre: I see. So you do have it? But are unwilling to share it with this court and His Majesty?
Alexandros Kostopoulos : “ No I am unwilling to share it with you my Lord. If his Majesty Asks me for the letter I will hand it to him. But you are asking for it and that is not the same as if the King asked for it.
Sastre: Your Majesty? Do you believe this letter would be of relevance to the case?
@Michaelangelo
Sastre: My Lord Athens, can you shed some light on why exactly you changed your vote after contact with Antonio di Arezzo?
Alexandros Kostopoulos “ The reason I changed my vote is because I realized that Antonio had a good point. Europe does not have the money it used to have.. The new world does and he made a good point about that.
Sastre: You don’t happen to have kept a copy of the letter he sent you?
Alexandros Kostopoulos : That letter is private is none of your concern. A private letter is something that will never be shared with anyone else.
Sastre: I see. So you do have it? But are unwilling to share it with this court and His Majesty?
Alexandros Kostopoulos : “ No I am unwilling to share it with you my Lord. If his Majesty Asks me for the letter I will hand it to him. But you are asking for it and that is not the same as if the King asked for it.
Sastre: Your Majesty? Do you believe this letter would be of relevance to the case?
@Michaelangelo
Alexandros Kostopoulos chuckled as he listened and made a vote already. The man was clearly Innocent and the cardinal was out of line
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent
Alexandros Kostopoulos Count of Athens
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent
Alexandros Kostopoulos Count of Athens
I think it is quite clear by now that the letter most likely revolves around the gift of a boat to the count of Athens as well as asking for his support in the recent vote on our trade focus. I personally do not feel the need to see it, but if any of the council members require it to help determine their case, I advise the count to comply. I will not force him to hand over his private letters though.
- His Majesty, Ferran III de Trastámara, King of Aragon and Protector of the Greeks
((I just want to thank @Keinwyn for all his hard work and help. This has been a terribly busy and disorganized afternoon and I apologize for any disorder I have caused.))
- May 6, 2015
- 2.278
- 3.161
((Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent))
The current evidence overwhelmingly shows that Antonio is innocent. I believe cardinal Modena is just jealous of our succes.
The current evidence overwhelmingly shows that Antonio is innocent. I believe cardinal Modena is just jealous of our succes.
- 1
Despite his position as Representative of the Bank, I do not think that the Count of Sevilla can be held accountable for the Bank’s actions in Portugal, nor is it his responsibility to police the morals of those he does business with on their behalf. His willingness to be involved with, and benefit from, this institution speaks more of his moral character than it does of treasonous activity. Unfortunately, low moral character is not a crime.
Armand sounds like he wishes it were.
Evidence linking di Arezzo to these attempts at ‘persuasion’ of de Almeria’s is circumstantial at best.
It is unfortunate that My Lord Athens feels his correspondence with di Arezzo is too personal to share. Too personal even for the purposes of clearing his friend’s name. I urge the court not to speculate on these personal matters, that is not our task. I fear, however, that this may leave something of a cloud over My Lord Sevilla’s reputation.
What select correspondence di Arezzo has deigned to share with us demonstrates a large emphasis on personal connection and favour. Nowhere is the good of the realm advocated or championed. That these missives were capable of swaying votes is most disturbing.
Antonio di Arezzo was accused of Treason. I have seen no evidence of that.
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent
However, If I may, I would advise Your Majesty to remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia until such a time as he resigns his post as Representative of the Bank of Tuscany.
The conflict of interest established here between his role in the Bank and his voting on matters of trade and colonisation is irrefutable.
If he truly wishes to advocate the interests of Sevilla, the only honourable course is to remove any doubt as to his motives.
Armand sounds like he wishes it were.
Evidence linking di Arezzo to these attempts at ‘persuasion’ of de Almeria’s is circumstantial at best.
It is unfortunate that My Lord Athens feels his correspondence with di Arezzo is too personal to share. Too personal even for the purposes of clearing his friend’s name. I urge the court not to speculate on these personal matters, that is not our task. I fear, however, that this may leave something of a cloud over My Lord Sevilla’s reputation.
What select correspondence di Arezzo has deigned to share with us demonstrates a large emphasis on personal connection and favour. Nowhere is the good of the realm advocated or championed. That these missives were capable of swaying votes is most disturbing.
Antonio di Arezzo was accused of Treason. I have seen no evidence of that.
Trial of Antonio di Arezzo: Innocent
However, If I may, I would advise Your Majesty to remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia until such a time as he resigns his post as Representative of the Bank of Tuscany.
The conflict of interest established here between his role in the Bank and his voting on matters of trade and colonisation is irrefutable.
If he truly wishes to advocate the interests of Sevilla, the only honourable course is to remove any doubt as to his motives.
Last edited:
Jaume Limmona was getting old, and didn't want to be here. He and his father had never managed to make many friends (or even enemies) at court and so he didn't really have a personal agenda either way in regards to the trial. Sitting there silently he motions to the king when there is a moment that he largely agrees with Sastre (@Keinwyn) and wishes for the king to consider that Jaume throws his lot in with him in both the trial and a suitable punishment by revoking the viceroyalty. He didn't know Sastre or Antonio that well but Sastre seemed to be the most logical. Having managed to show the king this at some point, he sat there silently and waited for the other judges and the king to speak.
((Trial : Innocent))
((Remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia))
((Trial : Innocent))
((Remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia))
All this talk about count of Sevilla being guilty gave Philippe quite a headache. The evidence might have been there, but none were present during the trial.... Without deciding evidence nothoc could be done.
I don't want this to prolong this and I do not see any evidence that would make the count od Sevilla guilty. But one thing keeps bugging me. The count isn't of Aragonese blood, yet he still was granted Sevilla. This means that anyone can ask for the land that rightfully belongs to the King! Better yet Antonio was appointed a viceroy! While I do not think that Antonio is a bad man I thik he should be punished by either removing him from his position as the viceroy, or by revoking his title.
((Trial : Innocent))
((Remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia OR Revoke the county of Sevilla))
I don't want this to prolong this and I do not see any evidence that would make the count od Sevilla guilty. But one thing keeps bugging me. The count isn't of Aragonese blood, yet he still was granted Sevilla. This means that anyone can ask for the land that rightfully belongs to the King! Better yet Antonio was appointed a viceroy! While I do not think that Antonio is a bad man I thik he should be punished by either removing him from his position as the viceroy, or by revoking his title.
((Trial : Innocent))
((Remove the Count of Sevilla as Viceroy of Sanchonia OR Revoke the county of Sevilla))
((I'm sure Lübecker is cursing the explorer somewhere in Hawaii.))
Elsewhere in the world, Ferdinand is stabbing Sancho's corpse with his sword
- 6
- May 6, 2015
- 2.278
- 3.161
"I think cardinal Modena should be removed from his position of court chaplain. This was clearly an abuse of power. The removal of Antonio's position as viceroy is misguided at best. I have almost constant connection and knowledge of the new world and Sanchonia is flourishing under his administration."
- 1
((If Antonio is innocent then why should he lose his positions? There is no law Antonio broke.
Talking about conflict of interest the same can be argued for being Grandmaster and Head of the TPTC))
Talking about conflict of interest the same can be argued for being Grandmaster and Head of the TPTC))
Jealous of you success? I have been a Archbishiop since my 20s, a missionary, steward, heir of the small D'Este fortune, patron of the arts, founder of the first zoo in Europe, funder of Lubecker, appointed Cardinal, Primate of all Sardinian Bishops, given Vice-Chancellorship (the highest rank in the Vatican other than Pope), and awarded the Royal Order of Light.
I do this not out of jealously or greed; I gain nothing from this that I don't already have. I want to bust out some of the corrupt practices that are fast becoming the status quo in Aragon. If the council doesn't find him guilty of treason, at least investigate what Sastre and I have uncovered in terms of the Seville bribes.
If his highness doesn't require my services as chaplain after the trial, I will return to Rome and continue to serve Aragon there. I will not stop trying to fight corruption and though I am weak in body, I am not weak in mind and spirit.
May God's light shine through the council's actions and long live Ferran III!
- 1
- May 6, 2015
- 2.278
- 3.161
Let me get this straight: You got a irrelevant island, burned a bunch of people and build some building, got some money, gave it all away, put some animals in cages, clearly funded the wrong explorer, got some titles and got in the royal order of light, together with that damned Lübecker?
In less than 1/5th of your time, I became one of the richest men in Aragon, revolutionised the Aragonese navy, made the lands of Andalucia some of the richest regions in Aragon, even after the riches of the Moors had been stolen by the Castillians and have become one of the most politically influential men in Aragon. I do infact hate the heretics and infidels, but I am in no way supporter of destruction. Culture, and history, are to be learned from, not to be burned by fires, pillaged by soldiers and destroyed by cannons.
((Delivering that sick burn.))
Last edited:
- 2