Trials

WIP

Trials

The right to a fair trial is one of the fundamental rights granted to any sentient being, or so you would think. As an employee of Nanotrasen this is not a right but a privilege that is rarely granted. However in the courtroom, all are seen as equals in the eyes of Justice.

This guide is simply a recommendation. It is not required for trials to follow this structure, and you are free to use or ignore any the suggestions made in this guide as needed to improve your experience.

Case Types

Usually a trial will happen to address one of two types of cases:

Civil Cases: A civil case is one brought by one private party against another in order to resolve some minor dispute not covered by Space Law. For example if Passenger is spreading lies against the Quartermaster then the Quartermaster may sue the Passenger on charges of slander or libel.

Criminal Case: A criminal case is one brought from the station authority such as Security, or Command for violations of Space Law. These cases are usually about severe incidents involving High Crimes. For example security may bring charges against an engineer for sabotaging the Anti Matter Engine.

While it may seem there is not much of a distinction, the biggest difference between the two are that Civil Cases usually do not carry any criminal punishment for the defendant, and are usually held to resolve a disagreement between crew members. In contrast a criminal case will usually deal with serious crimes against the station and possibly NanoTrasen itself which may lead to punishments such as permanent confinement or even execution.

Trial Prerequisites

Judge must be appointed. This may be the Captain, the Head of Personnel, another Head of Staff, or any authorized individual. The role of the Judge is to preside over the proceedings, resolve any disputes arising from them, and pass sentencing. Additionally during a bench trial it is also the Judge's responsibility to decide on a verdict for the defendant.

In the case of criminal trials, a Prosecutor must be appointed. This can either be the warden, a security officer familiar with the case, a lawyer, or any other authorized individual. The prosecutor's role is not to get a guilty verdict at all costs, but to uncover the truth and act in the best interests of justice.

The defendant in a criminal trial is entitled to an Attorney, and in Civil Cases both parties may acquire one. This may be a lawyer, or any other competent individual. The attorney's role is to zealously represent their client, and attain the most favorable verdict possible.

A Jury may be formed in order to decide the verdict. The Jury may be composed by any member of the crew, and the number of jurors is at the discretion of the Judge. Additionally, a bench trial may be conducted instead where instead of a Jury the verdict is decided by judge, or a panel of Judges.

A Bailiff should be appointed by the judge. This may be the Head of security, the warden, or any authorized individual. The Bailiff's role is to ensure the security of the trial, and command the security forces in the courtroom.

Before a trial can begin both parties must be given a fair chance to prepare their case. Parties should be given access to each other's evidence for review, and should have a window of time to properly prepare a strategy for the trial. During this process the parties should object to unlawful evidence. Should any issues arise in this process, it is up to the judge to resolve them.

Trial Procedure

Once everything is ready, the Judge may begin the trial. A trial can be broken into the following stages:

Opening Statements: The prosecution, and defense give a brief statement on what they hope to prove in the trial.

Evidence Presentation: The prosecution will begin presenting their evidence, and attempt to prove their case. During this stage the defense may raise objections, and the prosecution may call on witnesses to testify. Witnesses are subject to cross-examination by the defense where the defense may attempt to scrutinize the witness' claim and impeach their credibility.

Rebuttal: Once the prosecution is done presenting their case, the defense may start rebutting it with theirs. They will similarly present their evidence, the prosecution may raise objections, and the defense may call witnesses which are also subject to cross-examination by the prosecution.

Closing Statements: The defense, and prosecution will make a brief statement summarizing what they believe they have shown and may state what course of action the court should take.

Verdict & Sentencing: The jury, or in the case of a bench trials the judges shall be sequestered from the rest of the crew in order to deliberate on a Verdict. Once a super majority of two thirds is reached, the verdict is announced. If the defendant is found guilty, the presiding Judge will give out an appropriate sentence. A guilty verdict by a jury may be overruled by the judge if he believes that the Jury's verdict is unreasonable.

Throughout this whole process the presiding Judge is allowed to intervene in order to address procedural violations, keep order in the courtroom, or press on issues that need elaboration by the parties.

Objections

Throughout the trial, both parties may raise objections as a formal form of protest to the Judge to disallow potentially unlawful witness testimony, or evidence which may be raised before the trial. As such objections will be broken down into 2 types:

Witness Objections: These are objections specific to a witness' testimony, or a party's conduct when dealing with a witness some common objection include:

• Assuming Facts not in Evidence: The question makes an assumption that has not yet been proven in evidence.
• Asked and Answered: The question has already been answered by the witness.
• Badgering: The party asking the question is needlessly antagonizing the witness.
• Compound Question: A question that contains two or more separate inquiries; requires multiple answers to a single question.
• Hearsay: Testimony made about a statement made by someone other than the witness.
• Inflammatory: The question is intended to cause prejudice.
• Non-Responsive Answer: The answer given does not respond to the question asked.
• Leading Question: The question asked to the witness suggests its own answer. For example: "Is it true that you saw the defendant in the Engineering lobby". Such questions however may be asked in cross-examination or if the witness is openly antagonistic towards the party that called them to testify.
• Relevance: The question is irrelevant to the case.
• Vague Question: A question that is incomprehensible, incomplete, or leads to an ambiguous answer.
• Foundation: The question relates to matters that the witness' personal experience does not extend to.
• Speculation: The witness is asked to speculate or guess the answer.
• Privilege: The witness may not legally answer a question. For example the captain cannot state information that has been classified by Nanotrasen.

Evidence of objections: These are objections specific to certain piece of evidence:

• Best Evidence: The original source of evidence must be used as evidence when available. Otherwise evidence may be used if it can be authenticated for example a copy of a document.
• Fruit of the Poisonous tree: The evidence was obtained illegally.
• Incomplete: The provided evidence is incomplete either because some of it was lost, or the party presenting it is withholding a part of it. For example a section of a document taken out of context.
• Lack of Foundation: The evidence cannot be authenticated.

Objections are to be adjudicated by the presiding Judge.

Mistrials

A mistrial occurs when there has been a serious error in the trial proceedings, or a jury is unable to reach a verdict. In such cases the trial is rendered null and void and a retrial may occur. This may be due to several causes such as:

• Conflict of interest: The Judge, or the Jury are incapable of impartially performing their duties, or if the counsel for either party has something to gain by getting a verdict against the interests of who they represent.
• Hung Jury: The Jury was unable to decide on a verdict in a reasonable amount of time.
• Improperly admitted evidence: Unlawful evidence was submitted during the trial.
• Misconduct: The actions of a party, juror, or an outside actor have made the carrying out of due process impossible.

Double Jeopardy

In order for the defendant to not be repeatedly sued for the same offense after he has already been found not guilty, A defendant may not be tried for a second time for an offense they were found to be guilty. The only exception to this is if there has been an extremely large error in the previous trial, or new critical evidence has surfaced. This does not prevent a defendant from requesting a retrial if they believe they were found guilty unfairly.