All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
  Offline
PostPosted: August 3rd, 2016, 6:31 am 
User avatar

Joined: April 28th, 2016, 6:15 pm
Posts: 2001
Location: California
Trial Guidlines

Members:
Judge (Justice Minister or King)
Defense
Prosecution
Witnesses
Jury
Attendees

Trial Order:

1. Judge calls the trial into session. Identifies the defendant and the prosecution.

2. Judge asks the defense and prosecution to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

3. Judge asks the prosecution to present the charges. Judge asks the defendant how the plea. If defendant pleads guilty to all charges, judge moves directly to sentencing. If not, the trial continues.

4. Prosecution provides their evidence, followed by questioning witnesses one at a time.

5. Defense providers their evidence, followed by questioning witnesses one at a time.

6. Closing statements, in turn.

7. Judge and/or jury delivers the verdict.

8. Judge delivers the sentence. Trial concludes.

Trial Conduct:
The only time one side is allowed to interrupt the other side is during witness questioning, and only by declaring "objection." They must give a reason, and if the judge agrees, then that line of questioning must be presented differently. If not, it is allowed. Interrupting during any other time is considered to be a violation, and the judge is allowed to consider this when making their judgement and/or sentence.

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 4th, 2016, 6:04 am 
User avatar
King

Joined: May 30th, 2015, 5:52 pm
Posts: 934
New draft! This language includes Mark's Order of Trial as well as a new section concerning an option for impartial Mediation to resolve smaller disputes, something a good many individuals suggested and a great alternative for handling smaller charges where the involved parties want a ruling but don't want to bother with a full trial.

------

IV. Judicial

Plea for Review and Dismissal of Charges Prior to Trial

After legal criminal or civil charges have been filed in the Judicial Court of the Mercurian Empire against a specific party or parties, the party or parties against whom the charges are being filed reserve the right to request an impartial review of the charges to determine their validity and if reasonable grounds exist for a trial. If any or all of the party or parties against whom the charges are being filed requests this, the sitting Minister for Justice must undertake a review of the charges laid with the intent to determine if the evidence presented provides reasonable grounds for a trial. In order to determine reasonable grounds for a trial, the review must determine that evidence provided by the claimant demonstrates both

a) that the specific crimes as detailed in the claimant's charges were committed in a manner consistent with the charges laid, and

b) that there exists reasonable suspicion that the specific party or parties accused committed a breach of the Imperial criminal and/or civil code in a manner consistent with the charges laid against them.

If upon completion of the review it is determined that both these requirements are met, reasonable grounds for trial exist; the trial may be scheduled at the discretion of the involved parties. If upon the completion of the review it is determined that both these requirements have not been met, reasonable grounds for trial do not exist; the charges filed shall be voided and not pursued by the Imperial Court. Any charges previously voided whose nature has changed due to the availability of new evidence may be reintroduced to the Judicial Court at any time, where they shall undergo a new review following the aforementioned process by the Minister for Justice.

If the sitting Minister for Justice is inactive, is the claimant, is the party or is among the parties accused, was party to the charges laid, or is otherwise unwilling or unable to conduct the review, any active sitting member of the Council of the Crowned may volunteer to conduct the review.

Eligibility for Jury

Only noble titleholders - sitting members of The Council of the Crowned, sitting members of the House of Dukes, and Counts - are eligible to be members of the Jury. Should there be no jury, the judge will be the sole deliberator.

Appointing the Judge and Attorneys

The Judge of an Imperial Trial is tasked with the facilitation of the trial as per the process outlined in this section; they must oversee an equal and fair trial which affords all parties time to make their arguments, though they reserve the right to cut statements that become overly burdensome or irrelevant to the trial. The sitting Minister for Justice of the Imperial Cabinet shall be designated as the preferred judge for any Imperial Court Case. If the sitting Minister for Justice is inactive, is acting as the prosecution, is acting as the defence, is being called as a witness during the course of the trial, is otherwise implicated in the charges laid, or is otherwise unwilling or unable to act as judge, any sitting member of the Council of the Crowned may volunteer to act as judge. Should there be no available judge, the case will be adjourned until a judge can be found. When returning a verdict and/or delivering a sentence, the Judge commits to representing the case fairly and in the interests of the Empire and its founding ideals under the traditions of organic law and the respect for the will of the peoples of the Empire. The word of the peoples of the Empire must be represented by the Judge.

In a criminal or civil case filed by a specific party or parties, that party or parties shall form the prosecution. In a criminal or civil case filed on behalf of the community and the Empire as a whole, any active sitting member of the Council of the Crowned, sitting member of the House of Dukes, or Count can volunteer to be the crown prosecutor, with the responsibility of representing the case brought against the defence. The defendant(s) may represent him/themselves or alternatively may request a representative whose role may be assumed by any active sitting member of the Council of the Crowned, sitting member of the House of Dukes, or Count who volunteers.

Deliberation and Adjudication of Trials

The individuals party to a criminal or civil trial may include: the Judge, the Defence, the Prosecution, any Witnesses being called for testimony, members of the Jury, and members of the public acting as Spectators.

In order to maintain order and to ensure a fair and impartial trial, the order of events during a criminal or civil trial shall be as follows:

1. The Judge calls the trial into session, identifying the defendant and the prosecution as well as the sitting members of the Jury if applicable.

2. Judge asks the defense and prosecution to affirm that they shall tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

3. Judge requests the prosecution present the charges. Judge requests the defence submit a plea. If the defence submits a guilty plea to all charges, Judge moves directly to sentencing. If not, the trial continues.

4. Judge requests Prosecution provide their arguments and evidence in support of the charges laid. Prosecution may call witnesses to be questioned one at a time. Upon taking the witness stand, Judge asks each Witness to affirm that they shall tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

5. Judge requests Defense provide their arguments and evidence in support of the defence. Defence may call witnesses to be questioned one at a time. Judge asks each new Witness called to affirm that they shall tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

6. Prosecution submits their closing statement. Defence submits their closing statement.

7. Judge request the Jury deliver the verdict. If no Jury exists, the Judge shall return the verdict as the sole deliberator.

8. Judge delivers the sentence if applicable. Judge concludes the trial.

Option for Third-Party Mediation

If after legal criminal or civil charges have been filed in the Judicial Court of the Mercurian Empire against a specific party or parties

a) all parties agree that they do not wish to pursue the charges in an Imperial trial, yet

b) all parties still desire an impartial third-party ruling,

the parties reserve the right to request third-party mediation to attempt to resolve the conflict.

The sitting Minister for Justice shall be designated as the preferred Mediator. If the sitting Minister for Justice is inactive, is acting as the claimant, is or is among the parties against whom charges are being laid, is otherwise implicated in the charges laid, or is otherwise unwilling or unable to act as Mediator, any sitting member of the Council of the Crowned may volunteer to act as Mediator. Should there be no Mediator available, mediation shall be postponed until a Mediator can be found.

Upon requesting Mediation, all parties shall agree to participate actively in the mediation process and to follow the advice returned by the Mediator to resolve the conflict, though this advice is not legally binding in any form. All parties and the designated Mediator shall meet, and discuss the nature of the charges laid in an attempt to come to a resolution without taking the case to trial. If at the conclusion of mediation all parties agree to follow the advice of the Mediator, the claimant may agree to dismiss the charges. Contracts may be drafted and may be legally recognized by the Imperial Court as per the principles of Contractual Law (Section V) to assist in enforcing the advice of the Mediator if deemed appropriate.

If at the conclusion of mediation all parties are unable to come to an agreement, the claimant reserves the right to continue to press charges and to enter into trial.

_________________
Wysterian Labourer's Council
Currently Holding Stewardship of Wysteria

Minister for Applications and Settlement
Forums Administrator


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 4th, 2016, 6:09 am 
King

Joined: February 24th, 2016, 8:29 pm
Posts: 563
Holy, this is huge now! Curious question, what is the difference between judicial rights and judicial procedings? Are many of these "procedural processes" more than "inalienable rights"?

The wording is spot-on perfect. But is it worth making the trial procedure an act of its own? Sorry for throwing a wrench in the works, if everyone completely disagrees I understand.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 4th, 2016, 6:18 am 
User avatar
King

Joined: May 30th, 2015, 5:52 pm
Posts: 934
This is a good point. The Order language is contained here as it is essentially a rewrite of the old 'Deliberation and Adjudication' section - the old Carta contained a rough outline of the judicial process, so it was felt that it made sense to keep it here.

That said, the old language was more in the vein of 'rights', so I certainly see your point sir! Overall, I would say that we keep it here; while there is an argument to be made for it's being a separate act, I think we should also take pains to look at this from a new player readability angle. It makes enough sense for it to be here, is easy to locate here, and allows members of the community unfamiliar with judicial rights and processes to get the full overview here.

Just my two cents.

_________________
Wysterian Labourer's Council
Currently Holding Stewardship of Wysteria

Minister for Applications and Settlement
Forums Administrator


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 4th, 2016, 6:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: April 28th, 2016, 6:15 pm
Posts: 2001
Location: California
Nicholas wrote:
This is a good point. The Order language is contained here as it is essentially a rewrite of the old 'Deliberation and Adjudication' section - the old Carta contained a rough outline of the judicial process, so it was felt that it made sense to keep it here.

That said, the old language was more in the vein of 'rights', so I certainly see your point sir! Overall, I would say that we keep it here; while there is an argument to be made for it's being a separate act, I think we should also take pains to look at this from a new player readability angle. It makes enough sense for it to be here, is easy to locate here, and allows members of the community unfamiliar with judicial rights and processes to get the full overview here.

Just my two cents.


Agreed.

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 4th, 2016, 6:28 am 
King

Joined: February 24th, 2016, 8:29 pm
Posts: 563
Great point about the newcomers and ease of reviewing the laws. Good stuff.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 6th, 2016, 4:03 am 
User avatar
Duke

Joined: June 1st, 2015, 12:47 am
Posts: 725
Well constructed and clear language. This will be very helpful in any future legal proceedings.

_________________
Ulrik Gunnarson
Duke of the Gathered Races of Hermertia Homeland (GRHH)
The Chairman of the GRHH Co.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
  Offline
PostPosted: August 6th, 2016, 5:02 pm 
User avatar
King

Joined: May 31st, 2015, 3:32 am
Posts: 846
We can also make it a guideline or best practice so to speak as well. Something to follow more than a law. :)

_________________
Scrios V
King of Perth, Brother of Valyria


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Imperium - Modified by Rey phpbbmodrey