Supreme Court
Docket: SC-130
Parties
GreenArcher
Plaintiff
Attorney: GreenArcher
VS.
notsyam
Defendant
Attorney: BoolinJones
Hearing Details
Type of Hearing Criminal
Hearing Location Supreme Court
Date Scheduled 30th August 2026
Time Scheduled 14:00 PM UTC
Submitted 25th August 2026, 09:06 AM UTC 2 weeks ago
Court Outcome Not Guilty
Information
The Department of Justice, on behalf of the Department of Defense, is requesting the addition of notsyam to the Ban on Sight and National Punishment list for committing a "Breach of Ethics" under Part 7, Section 3, Subsection 4 of the Prosecution Act 2025 and “Terrorism” under Part 2, Section 1, Subsection 1 of the Defense Act 2025.

The justification for this placement is based on documented evidence and corroborating information indicating that notsyam, the former Solicitor General, engaged in conduct involving the alteration, removal, and/or defacement of official White House and Department of Justice resources.

Prior to his resignation, notsyam represented that he would make available all active files, records, and materials under his responsibility and would cooperate with any necessary handover arrangements in order to ensure a smooth transition. Despite that representation, official Department of Justice resources associated with his work were subsequently found to have been removed, altered, undone, or otherwise made unavailable.

The Department further notes that, prior to his resignation, notsyam expressed dissatisfaction with recent White House appointments and with room-rights privileges afforded to other high-ranking officials. These concerns were made known in a conversation involving the Vice President. While disagreement with appointments or access privileges does not itself constitute misconduct, the Department believes this information provides relevant context regarding a possible motive for the conduct that followed.
The Department of Defense’s assessment is that the alleged conduct, if accepted by the Court, represents a serious breach of the trust afforded to notsyam through his position as Solicitor General. His access to these resources was provided for official governmental purposes, and the intentional alteration, removal, damage, or defacement of those resources is fundamentally incompatible with the integrity and orderly operation expected within the White House community.

Location: Habbo White House Website, Discord conversations
Date: August 16, 2026
Evidence
Restricted Evidence: Evidence has been submitted for this case but has not been released publicly. Only authorised personnel can view it.
Court Opinion
Written by Kelpti 30th August 2026, 17:00 PM UTC
The court has come to a decision that the BoS/NP for “Terrorism” Charges under Part 2, Section 1, Subsection 1 of the Defense Act 2025 for the Defense, Notsyam rules at 0-3.

Furthermore, Upon the “Breach of Ethics" Charges under Part 7, Section 3, Subsection 4 of the Prosecution Act 2025, we have found the Defense, Notsyam guilty 3-0. Approving a Full Branch Blacklist. (Every Branch) to every Branch 3-0.

While the court acknowledges that edits made to the site, We, The Court strongly recommend that the Department of Justice gather screenshots to affected site pages before reverting the site back to the original state. As, there is no proof submitted to the court, what kind of edits were made. The Court cannot reasonably assume that the changes were made with a “terroristic” intent or stance without additional foundational evidence supporting such a conclusion. As the screenshots submitted into court only TALK about a page revision.

The Court therefore emphasizes the importance of preserving the existing evidence before any restoration or modification of the website takes place.

On that note, Be warned it is absolutely distasteful that site changes were made without first contacting the ACTING AG at the time OLLIESAFE. When a person submits a resignation or transfer, we should always see a peaceful transition. Regardless of the circumstances surrounding a resignation or transfer, proper procedures and communication should be followed to prevent unnecessary disputes and preserve the integrity of the White House and its departments.

Lastly, I STRONGLY recommend that this White House get an Intellectual property law in place, ASAP.
Establishing such legislation would provide the White House with a clear framework for addressing future disputes and ensuring that official property is protected appropriately.

Case presided by; Pawtistic and Brokyy_, and Deputy CJ Kelpti
Justice

Useful Links

Disclaimer

TheHabboWH.org is not affiliated with, endorsed, sponsored, or specifically approved by Sulake Corporation Oy or its Affiliates. TheHabboWH.org may use the trademarks and other intellectual property of Habbo, which is permitted under Habbo Fan Site Policy.

© Habbo White House, 2026
Developed With By Owen?.