The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

Vaticania Prime:
I’m also interested to know how a trial without jury can be considered safe. Historically this type of trial has proven to be flawed, subject to abuse and the source of many successful judicial reviews.
Click to expand...
I agree that a trial by jury is preferable from a legal standpoint, as well as a political one, as it serves as a check on the power of the judicial branch. In practice, however, the logistics of a jury trial have proven daunting.
 
like, finding twelve good men and true for example.

But finding a jury all of whom would stay active and engaged for a whole trial would be impossible. Particularly in a trial where even the defence attourney has buggered off and left the defendant to flounder around attempting his own defence.
 
What a very unbiased assessment you've come up with there, Flemmy.

The fact is that if Zorro doesn't work for the Intel Ministry of TNP, he can't have witness protection under the law; there is simply nothing that can even come close to entitling him with those 'rights' unless he works for the Intel Ministry. Otherwise both Eras and Blade both could have been put up on the stand as "anonymous" witnesses.

In fact, that's not a bad idea, I'm going to anonymously call all of my witnesses from now on the grounds that their testimony is so critical that the Prosecution should not be allowed to know their name.

It doesn't really do much for the justice of the trial, but it sure as hell makes it hard for the other side to ask questions...oh and if they ask a question I don't like I'll just object to it under the premises that the nature of the question would "give away the identity of the witness".

If anyone thinks my idea is silly, by-the-by, don't laugh, the Prosecution is working that very angle right now. :jack:
 
The fact is that if Zorro doesn't work for the Intel Ministry of TNP, he can't have witness protection under the law
Click to expand...

Why is that a fact? you tend to use the words "fact" and "legal" very loosely, without ever backing up what you say. I see nothing in our legal code or constitution that makes this a fact. And "wishin don't make it so"

And, by your assessment, if we do not have an intel ministry, we cannot have any anonymity - a foolish notion.

The court (not counsel for either side, by the way) can offer any witness anonymity - not just civil servants - if it decides to do so. this is true in most RL legal systems, and makes sense in NS too. I agree with some of the correspondents that this provision should be rarely used, as it has been in TNP, but the time to challenge this anonymity was at the point when the evidence was accepted, not to make it a continual winge throughout the trial.

Your carping about the anonymity of your witness is not making any sort of case for the defence. Move on and actually build a defence, if you have one. Because at the moment you appear to be floundering.
 
Flem, I don't see anything in my comments stating that protectiion of a witnesses identity should not be given I merely point out the perils of doing so without applying due safeguards. The point is what does the constitution and law of TNP say on the matter.

As for trial by jury, you say impossible but has it been attempted, what lessons were learnt if it failed and why do you accept that something is impossible if you haven't attempted it?

One other issue that has been nagging at me. Has any unused material been revealed to the defence? The prosecution has a duty to present in pre trial any and all evidence it has uncovered to the defence even if it were to undermine it's own case. This is a fundamental safeguard to avoid miscarriages of justice and to avoid the need for costly and pointless trials.

VP :noangel:
 
Why didn't it work, are there alternatives to be considered? I'm genuinely interested in exploring the options as the currentsystem has too many dangers for my liking.

VP :noangel:
 
Was having a panel of judges considered? I'm just throwing out some ideas here so let me know if they have been attempted.

Why not put it to a general vote at the end of evidence and cross examination, thread stays open for asay 48 hours and any interested party votes innocent or guilty. That way you don't need to be present for the full trial but can review the transcript at your leasure.

VP :noangel:
 
Vaticania Prime:
Why not put it to a general vote at the end of evidence and cross examination, thread stays open for asay 48 hours and any interested party votes innocent or guilty. That way you don't need to be present for the full trial but can review the transcript at your leasure.

VP :noangel:
Click to expand...
Why not? It works so well on American idol...
 
Has to be an improvement on the current system then doesn't it. Are you saying in all honesty that you truly believe a single person acting as judge and jury can be really impartial? And please don't give me the pathetic excuse of it's the only workable solution.

VP :noangel:
 
Vaticania Prime:
Has to be an improvement on the current system then doesn't it. Are you saying in all honesty that you truly believe a single person acting as judge and jury can be really impartial? And please don't give me the pathetic excuse of it's the only workable solution.

VP :noangel:
Click to expand...
A single ELECTED official. We place far more faith in one person for a lot more, than our judges. I think this judge-bashing is completely contemptible, especially as it wasn't even that long ago judicial reform was proposed. Where were you again when that happened? You were around, asked to join the RA to participate then...
 
Precisely why an ELECTED representative, with all the good will in the world cannot be impartiabl. That is exactly why we have trial by jury in RL. Thanks for arguing my point.

Sorry I don't understand your second point, you seem to have had a dyslexia moment as it doesn't make much sense and I'd hate to respond based on a misunderstanding.

And just to clarify, how have I judge bashed when it is the system I am questioning and not the individual. Please don't drag this into the gutter by making it a matter of personalities when it is the process I am voicing concern over.

VP :noangel:
 
Vaticania Prime:
Precisely why an ELECTED representative, with all the good will in the world cannot be impartiabl. That is exactly why we have trial by jury in RL. Thanks for arguing my point.

Sorry I don't understand your second point, you seem to have had a dyslexia moment as it doesn't make much sense and I'd hate to respond based on a misunderstanding.

And just to clarify, how have I judge bashed when it is the system I am questioning and not the individual. Please don't drag this into the gutter by making it a matter of personalities when it is the process I am voicing concern over.

VP :noangel:
Click to expand...
If you need to resort to name calling and making fun of serious mental defects, I'm not even going to respond.
 
I don't see anything in my comments that can possibly be interpreted as name calling and as someone who personally exhibits mild dyslexia I take great insult from you describing myself and anyone else with the condition as being mentally defected. This is both a grossly inaccurate, deeply offensive and ignorant statement to make and reflects very badly on your personality.

Throughout this thread I have pained myself to remain focussed on the issue of challenging the process rather than the personality but this seems to be something beyond your ability to comprehend. If you are incapable of having a rational and adult debate then yes it probably is for the best that you don't respond as you obviously have nothing of value or significance to say.

A deeply offended VP :mad:
 
*passes out chill pills*

I think this is the first trial we have had since we abandoned the old jury system. While it may not be perfect, I am interested to see if it proves a more workable system. I will say I have complete confidence in HC's ability to render an impartial decision in this matter.

VP's idea of having the RA vote on a verdict is interesting. I can see it working if there were sufficient safeguards in place to prevent stacking the vote. I think the concept merits further discussion.

It would be helpful if we could somehow address the length of time a trial takes. Maybe use IRC for cross-examination and then post the log. I don't know, but something should be done about the pace of the proceedings.

*falls asleep in her Guatemalan rum punch*
 
I don't know if there is any way of selecting a random sample of individuals to act as a jury but then again I'm not very IT literate so maybe wiser minds than mine can answer that.

As mentioned, the largest advantage of selecting a jury maybe at the end of a trial is that all they need to do is review the trial thread and then make their decision. No requirement to hang around waiting on the trial to progress as it will have already concluded.

Still no answer on the unused evidence question, does anyone have a thought on that?

VP :noangel:
 
Without arguing the merits of a jury system v. a judge system, remember that such a change would require a vote by the RA, which could not appropriately be applied retroactively.
 
Perhaps a three judge panel can review the case at the end. As of right now there are two justices that are just sitting around on their hands doing nothing. :pinch:
 
Ator I agree, these are just my observations of what I believe is wrong currently and how in the future the problem could be avoided. Certainly any changes have to have the backing of the general populous through a vote so it sounds like we are singing from the same hymn sheet here.

The idea of a panel of judges is also valid but I would argue that this should only be employed for minor offences such as with the magistrates system employed in England where three mags form the panel. For more serious offenses such as the current matter I still believe that this needs some sort of jury aspect.

VP :noangel:
 
VP, you are entitled to your opinion. However jury trials are no longer a part of the legal system of TNP, having been deliberately removed due to the historical experience of them now working very well. Considering the state of inactivity in the RA and the region at large I think it would be even more difficult to successfully carry out now, purely from a practical perspective.

With regards to your question about evidence, I believe so but I think - due to the internet - it would be almost impossible to enforce. Consider that in RL it would not be possible for Khark to pull the stunt he did at the beginning of the trial. Here, unfortunately, there is little plausible room for action.



To everyone, I'd like to recommend that those who are commenting here perhaps consider directing their energies towards this thread where they can help reform some of the points that have been raised here.

In particular if my fellow judges would like something constructive to do maybe they could help out there as well.
 
Haor, I agree that there are issues relating to a jury in an inactive region as it's highly unlikely that you could guarantee all selected could or would be available for the full duration of a trial such as the current one. That is why I proposed selecting them only at the end of the formal trial and have them vote after reviewing the transcript of evidence and statement. A much higher probability of keeping their attention and getting a result wouldn't you agree?

VP :noangel:
 
Also, concerning disclosure of unused material (evidence), any and all material should be placed in the hands of the court so I see no difficulty in access being given to the defence of unused material. As in RL,if it is proven that prosecution has deliberately or accidentally failed to reveal all material they hold then this is in itself grounds to consider a mis-trial.

VP :noangel:
 
Interesting point from BW, and yes he is clearly probing to identify the accuser but then again who wouldn't. The issue is, where do you draw the line between protecting the witness and the accuseds right to defend themselves.

Can a trial be truly fair if you never get to face your accuser, balanced against would anyone volunteer evidence if they knew they would be exposed. An interesting dilemma in ethics I think.

The starting point has to be what is the witness being protected from?

VP :noangel:
 
It really has nothing to do with the identity of the witness, I already figured that one out awhile ago. It has everything to do with getting the information released that clears my name, something that this "secret witness" crap blocks me from doing.
 
Who is it? You're not under any rules to conceal the name, right? Out your accuser, because they are a coward.

Edit: Plus this is really boring stuff and it might spice things up, and honestly what is there to lose? I'm sure you would be devastated to be banned (Oh no!) from here. How terrible it would be for you to not be tried for :bs: ever again.
 
Hmm, I'm not sure if I can say it, but I will say he (sort of) worked for Lone Wolves United and I'm about positive he misquoted me seeing as LWU planned and participated with a massive invasion of TWP which displaced then tyrant Eli from the delegacy not a week after that conversation.
 
If the identity of the mystery witness is known by the defence and the purpose of the witness protection was to prevent this then surely the witness protection is void and invalid.

Obviously this could be a case of defence calling the courts bluff but if he reveals the identity to HC in chambers so to speak, then there is no legal bar to the identity of the witness being revealed to the court and public in general.

VP :noangel:
 
I have to say that all the trivial threads are highly irritating especially when they bounce something people need to be aware of, such as the trial, off the Top Ten board. But then again, they are only a reflection of what people perceive to be important.

VP :noangel:
 
The amusing thing is that right before elections activity will “pick up” in a sad attempt by whomever is running the government at the time to fake activity. This is especially true if they are running for re-election.
 
No, this is a well known trend to any one who has spent any significant amount of time in TNP since the fall of Pixiedance. The balance of power simply shifts from one inactive regime to the next with a lot of false promises of activity in-between.
 
One fact being true does not, in this instance mean that the other is false. In common with most regions, TNP gains in activity just before and just after elections. This is sad but true. Part of this is doubtless attributable to faux activity in order to gain votes, some to the inevitable interest and expectations that elections excite.

However, it is also true that the summer brings a downturn in activity, which generally picks up in September. Although this effect has been less noticable in the past three years, when the summer lull has not seen a corresponding pickup in the Autumn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top