Return to Answer

###You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

###Reference: Regarding the right to not self-incriminate

In the American legal system, it's sometimes thought that defendants can claim innocence without further penalty if that claim is later found to be false. This follows from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution which grants protection against self-incrimination.

The funny part about this is that, if you watch a lot of Law-&-Order-type shows (as many Americans do), you may be used to the idea that defendants can lie about not being guilty without penalty, which one might be inclined to apply to other court-like settings, e.g. an honor council review.

The thing is that honor councils aren't courts of law; the right to not self-incriminate doesn't apply. So if you lie in your defense to an honor council, you're still lying before the exact people who'll judge you for that exact misconduct.

Edit: Went to fact-check myself on this point, and it appears that the Supreme Court ruled that lying in one's own defense can increase sentences:

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that criminal defendants who take the stand and testify falsely in their own defense may constitutionally be subjected to additional prison time for obstructing justice.

The decision overturned a ruling by a Federal appeals court in Richmond, which held in 1991 that the Constitution bars judges from imposing an additional sentence under Federal guidelines as punishment for "a disbelieved denial of guilt under oath."

-"Court Says False Testimony Can Bring Longer Sentence", NYTimes (1993).

So, apparently defendants can be penalized for lying in their own defense even in US courts.

You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

Reference: Regarding the right to not self-incriminate

In the American legal system, it's sometimes thought that defendants can claim innocence without further penalty if that claim is later found to be false. This follows from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution which grants protection against self-incrimination.

The funny part about this is that, if you watch a lot of Law-&-Order-type shows (as many Americans do), you may be used to the idea that defendants can lie about not being guilty without penalty, which one might be inclined to apply to other court-like settings, e.g. an honor council review.

The thing is that honor councils aren't courts of law; the right to not self-incriminate doesn't apply. So if you lie in your defense to an honor council, you're still lying before the exact people who'll judge you for that exact misconduct.

Edit: Went to fact-check myself on this point, and it appears that the Supreme Court ruled that lying in one's own defense can increase sentences:

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that criminal defendants who take the stand and testify falsely in their own defense may constitutionally be subjected to additional prison time for obstructing justice.

The decision overturned a ruling by a Federal appeals court in Richmond, which held in 1991 that the Constitution bars judges from imposing an additional sentence under Federal guidelines as punishment for "a disbelieved denial of guilt under oath."

-"Court Says False Testimony Can Bring Longer Sentence", NYTimes (1993).

So, apparently defendants can be penalized for lying in their own defense even in US courts.

###You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

###Reference: Regarding the right to not self-incriminate

In the American legal system, it's typically assumed that defendants can claim innocence without further penalty if that claim is later found to be false. This follows from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution which grants protection against self-incrimination.

The funny part about this is that, if you watch a lot of Law-&-Order-type shows (as many Americans do), you may be used to the idea that defendants can lie about not being guilty without penalty, which one might be inclined to apply to other court-like settings, e.g. an honor council review.

The thing is that honor councils aren't courts of law; the right to not self-incriminate doesn't apply. So if you lie in your defense to an honor council, you're still lying before the exact people who'll judge you for that exact misconduct.

###You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

###Reference: Regarding the right to not self-incriminate

In the American legal system, it's sometimes thought that defendants can claim innocence without further penalty if that claim is later found to be false. This follows from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution which grants protection against self-incrimination.

The funny part about this is that, if you watch a lot of Law-&-Order-type shows (as many Americans do), you may be used to the idea that defendants can lie about not being guilty without penalty, which one might be inclined to apply to other court-like settings, e.g. an honor council review.

The thing is that honor councils aren't courts of law; the right to not self-incriminate doesn't apply. So if you lie in your defense to an honor council, you're still lying before the exact people who'll judge you for that exact misconduct.

Edit: Went to fact-check myself on this point, and it appears that the Supreme Court ruled that lying in one's own defense can increase sentences:

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that criminal defendants who take the stand and testify falsely in their own defense may constitutionally be subjected to additional prison time for obstructing justice.

The decision overturned a ruling by a Federal appeals court in Richmond, which held in 1991 that the Constitution bars judges from imposing an additional sentence under Federal guidelines as punishment for "a disbelieved denial of guilt under oath."

-"Court Says False Testimony Can Bring Longer Sentence", NYTimes (1993).

So, apparently defendants can be penalized for lying in their own defense even in US courts.

###You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

###You might want to withdraw your appeal (if able)

At first glance, your argument looks entirely reasonable. This is, if you copied two lines of code (assuming that such was allowed) but simply failed to include a citation or forgot to remove it (as you've claimed), then that could basically be chalked up to an honest mistake, on-par with a typo. Such a mistake would be unfortunate, but hardly merit major punishment.

However, as others have noted, a closer look at the code makes it look like you completely copied the original code and then went out of your way to try to obfuscate that fact. This causes all sympathy to go out-the-window; if anything, you may be getting off too lightly.

But, then there's your appeal. The appeal itself appears to be based in a dishonest premise, much like this question does. It looks like you're lying to the honor council!

Such a lie would seem to be grounds for further punishment. This is, first there was the cheating - the severity of which you've now called attention to - and then also the apparently fraudulent defense.

I don't know what to tell you. On the one hand, this is pretty gross and it might actually be better if you learned your lesson now. But as an answer to this question, assuming that you're trying to minimize punishment, it'd seem like you might want to exit the appeal and leave things alone, rather than risk making them worse.

###Reference: Regarding the right to not self-incriminate

In the American legal system, it's typically assumed that defendants can claim innocence without further penalty if that claim is later found to be false. This follows from the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution which grants protection against self-incrimination.

The funny part about this is that, if you watch a lot of Law-&-Order-type shows (as many Americans do), you may be used to the idea that defendants can lie about not being guilty without penalty, which one might be inclined to apply to other court-like settings, e.g. an honor council review.

The thing is that honor councils aren't courts of law; the right to not self-incriminate doesn't apply. So if you lie in your defense to an honor council, you're still lying before the exact people who'll judge you for that exact misconduct.