Name: Taellra Dusk

Gender: female

Age: young, early-early adulthood . . . equivalent of about 16-22 in human years

Racial information: Race is Anaisra; native to small, peaceful Earth-type planet in the Sagittarius galaxy, orbiting Beta Niobe. Humanoid people; language is Phthengesthai (deemed unspeakable by anyone not born planetside) and is a combination of ph's, th's, flowing vowels, and whispery consonants.

However, I was not born on our homeworld. After several millennia of proceeding much as humans have, our world grew over-populated and terribly crowded. Our scientists (this was perhaps three centuries past) turned their attentions to developing better interstellar travel – of course we'd already realized this. Within two decades, we were able to colonize the rest of our system and achieve peace with the native races – such as the G'kals, the Voiceless Ones, and the Fsh'th – and take our place among the other races represented here.

Personal history: born (date unknown; not culturally important) on a space station orbiting Saturn. Parents also unknown; given over to the – "State" would be the closest applicable term in human culture – in toddlerhood. Raised by one of the Elders on the station (name: Venitus, position: guardian) until age-approximate 15 (majority for Anaisra). Brought up in completely open-minded surroundings; Anaisra station's sole purpose observation, not judgment. Trained for observation of Earth-planet, station's mission. Unfortunately for personal-observation purposes, less than 2 year-approximates later C.S.F.R. (Council of Space-Faring Races) determined Earth-lets a danger to selves, others and convened current trial. During upbringing I had studied our prior observations extensively, so C.E. (Council of Elders, each race in the CSFR has several; this was specific to our station) appointed me as our representative.

Values: safety, logic (which comes with emotions, don't forget), peace, nonviolence, order. Rules should make sense. If they don't, then people won't follow them and order cannot be maintained. And if someone doesn't act for the good of others, then they are a danger to themselves and everyone around them, and should be quarantined so that wrong thoughts don't perpetuate.

Views On:

Crime: in our society it does not exist. All exist and operate for the good of all, not solely for self. Self-betterment is only possible through the betterment of all.

Government: should be simple, concise, and to the point. Excessive regulations should theoretically not be necessary, as at the first sign of transgression an individual should be isolated and monitored.

Television: harmless, until severe violence is introduced. Then it should be used as a cautionary tale (don't play with matches & gasoline, don't use sharp objects [or blunt objects, for that matter] against others, etc.) and not as solely entertainment.

Law: again, simple, concise, and effective. Transgressors should be swiftly and efficiently dealt with, not mollycoddled. Once a system moves to protecting the "rights" of the accused, then the victims are lost in a sea of paperwork and the purpose is defeated.

Literature: again, potential for cautionary tales AND entertainment simultaneously. However, not all should have morals – bubblegum or fluff is encouraged for mental satisfaction. Constant dignity is wearing on the psyche.

Voting rights: should be available to all except transgressors. Provided you are educated and informed as to the issue, and not a moral deviant, there is no harm in voting.

Position of power: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Responsibility needs to be shared among all, and despots must not be allowed.

Music: should bring peace to the mind and psyche; whatever floats your boat goes. Music should not be regulated, except insofar as much as certain ideals cannot be broadcast in any medium (reckless anarchy, unsafe conditions, anything contrary to nature). So-called "death-metal" is soothing to some, as is "punk," (for reasons we are unable to fathom) "rap," and "emo." While these are unfortunate categories, nothing is dangerous about them and they would be allowed.

Criteria for judgment:

Personal safety. If you are not safe, chances are others are not, and the well-being of all is to be first priority.

Universal safety. Again, if one is not safe, then many are not, and safety is paramount.

Logic. If something doesn't make sense, don't do it and don't make others do it. Safety makes sense, and non-safety doesn't.

Fairness. Decisions should be fair, just, and reasonable.

Applicability. Whatever is decided, needs to be able to be carried out. If you can't enact your verdict, then what good is it?

Unbiased. If personal feelings get in the way, then the verdict must be stricken and retried. Emotions (other than a desire for justice and fairness) must not be allowed to enter into a juror's consciousness.

Bias. As in point of view. Obviously some species will have a greater tie to one verdict or another, and that must be taken into account and allowed for. Example: someone whose race has a conflict of interest must try to maintain as little bias as possible, and must be counterbalanced with a conflicting conflict of interest.

Long-term effects. Jurors should consider the consequences of any verdict, such as collateral damage (animals, plant life, nonhumans).

Short-term effects. Colonization. Such a rich planet either needs to be taken better care of by its original inhabitants, or have a caretaker species appointed. Someone should make good use of the resources available.

Overall, what's best for all. The verdict must be clear, concise, correct, and final. No wiggle room can be permitted.