Mark Accynnafon wrote:
This would not be a process to overturn a verdict. It would only be a process to overturn a sentence that is overbearing. Nothing here was intended to create a process to overturn verdicts; I believe that is a separate discussion entirely.
How does this relate to the waiting period until after the sentence? What if a sentence is entirely contained within the waiting period, as in a hypothetical month server ban as a sentence could only be appealed after the month has past making it a mute point.
Having the appeals process as a system to ensure better judgements should mean that verdicts can be appealed rather than the focus on sentences. The appealing of sentences has more of a focus on reducing a punishment for crimes rather than ensuring good application of the law which seems to me to be a mistake.
I agree with the high majority threshold for successful appeals also, it's a sensible way to ensure a good appeal process regardless of it's focus.