Re: [RP] Trial by Peer ... Lord Elmix - January 1458

[arthur_loxley]

Darien made notes as Lord Elmix spoke, he looked up briefly when Lord Elmix made the first reference of the word "worm" and then he kept his eyes down and writing, when Lord Elmix had finished speaking and resumed his seat Darien continued to make notes, he had seen and heard much and wanted to process it all so he stayed silent for now.

[arthur_loxley]

quietly listens to both presenters, taking down some notes and scribbling out some questions at the bottom of my parchment....

[arthur_loxley]

Mala listened carefully as Lord Loxley and Lord Elmix made their statements. She was a little disappointed in Lord Elmix when he persisted in being disrespectful to a fellow peer, especially as this was why the trial was being held in the first place.

[arthur_loxley]

Arthur cleared his throat, then addressed the panel. Apologies for the interruptions in these proceedings; however, I request that Sir Elmix be warned about his conduct again. It is my understanding that he is not native in our language (OOC: English) and may not have taken the Lady High Chancellor's request for civility as a warning.

[arthur_loxley]

Jennet sat listening to the ongoing statements, glad to finally have the hearing underway, but her lips drew themselves into a thin line as Lord Elmix made his presentation.

At Lord Arthur's spoken request, she nodded once, acknowledging his statement, and caught the eye of the Chief Juror.

[arthur_loxley]

She caught the eye of the Chancellor, and gave her a slight nod. Revan looked briefly at her hands before beginning to speak.

"I should like to advise everyone in this courtroom that anything spoken in these chambers will be evaluated by the jury and may impact the outcome of this trial. Gentlemen, I ask you both to think before you speak. I know and understand that tempers may flare up due to the fact that we are having this trial, but alas, here we are, and we will finish this with common decency for one another. We may not like each other, but we are all people, and I believe that you can rely on just calling a person by their first name to refer to them if you choose to not state their title."

"Now ... for the record, we have heard the opening statements from both gentleman, and at this time I would like to invite the jurors to begin asking questions of the parties concerned. While I know and understand that there is no set time on how long jurors have to ask the questions, Arthur and Elmix have a set amount of time to answer them - 24 hours from the time each question is asked."

She paused for a moment and then continued. "If jurors wish to streamline the process, would it be acceptable to pass along a first round of questions to me on a note (ooc - pm or ig mail - /ooc) within a set timeframe, of 24 hours from this posting? Then I will present them to the courtroom, and the respondents have to answer them.

"After they have answered them, a second round of collecting questions will start out, with the same deadlines involved for both jurors and the respondents. If we need to do another round of questioning, we can continue to do so in this manner until everyone has the clarification that they need."

She looks around at the courtroom assembled around her. "If you do not agree, and would like to have questions to the respondents one by one, then I do not mind. This is just an idea of getting things done quickly so we may finish this matter sooner rather than later. I'll take no offense if we don't wish to proceed in this matter."

(ooc - please post if you have objections to this in the next 24 hours from my posting. I am mailing everyone involved in this trial to make sure that they are aware that if they want to object, they should do so asap -/ooc)

[arthur_loxley]

Lady Revandenizen,

If I understand you correctly, jurors will submit to you a list of questions for the Lords here and you will pose the questions in entirety at a single time by juror to the Lords who will then have a day to answer all our Round 1 questions? Then same procedure for Round 2 questions if it is needed?

If I understand you correctly, then I have no objections at this time.

[arthur_loxley]

Sitting and listening as the procedure proceeded, he makes more comfortable and laughs for himself as the worm once again have objections.

As lady chief juror finishes, he then says

I have no objection on your suggested procedure milady.

Then he sits even more comfortable in his seat and waits for it to begin. He really had much things to do and this will not delay him much.

[arthur_loxley]

Arthur nodded in acknowledgement of the procedure detailed by the Chief juror. No objections, Lady Revandenizen.

(OOC: I have a difficult time presenting to court after 6pm EST. This procedure would be better so that I won't miss questions or deadlines because of my inability to come online after a certain time.)

[arthur_loxley]

Lord Artur le Breton rises,

Honourable Chief Juror, I must object to the imposition of a twenty-four hour limit.
This house stands with gentlemen and gentlewomen who are in service to their grants of titled estates held for the Crown, along with service to their respected towns and counties. At times one must conduct affairs of state and family outside these chambers (OOC: RL), and in my humble opinion a response by either party in this trial by peer might require research as to the facts of the matter as well.

I therefore request a time limit of two days, forty-eight hours, instead of twenty-four to be held for all parties involved to make responses. Thank you.

The blacksmith of Lichfield then rises again to add,
On a personal note, I feel that our jury benefits from seeing responses to the questions of our peers before adding our own, rather than preparing them in advance without knowledge of answers to those of others. It's my preference that we have the ability to followup with questions or requests for clarification. What if Peers of the Jury prepare some questions that are nearly identical to others being prepared by their noble fellows? T'would be a waste of time and only add to the confusion, in my estimate.
He nods and returns to his seat on the bench.

[arthur_loxley]

Mala looked up from her notes. 'I have no objections to the time limits suggested here'

[arthur_loxley]

whispering over to Lord Artur le Breton...

M'Lord, I do believe we and the Chief Juror are legally bound to a 24 hour time for responses for questions by our Charter. That unfortunately is not something we can change I do not think during trial. Maybe after this trial, if we find it to be too constraining, we can bring that before the Rules committee for amendment.

[arthur_loxley]

"Lord Artur le Breton, you bring a valid point. However, I must go by what the procedures are for this trial, as stated here:

vi. The jurors may ask questions which the principals have one full day to answer.

Now, there isn't a time frame on when the jurors have to ask questions, but if we have different timelines than what are given than for the respondents, that is when people get confused. I know that we have many responsibilities and we cannot be here all day long, but in the interest of conducting a trial that is carried out in a reasonable amount of time, we must balance that out with having a trial that is clear and understandable to all parties.

I did think about having jurors ask questions as they could, but that could create the situation of if more than one juror speaks out at a time, where a respondent could miss answering a question with multiple people asking. Considering the penalties that could arise, I do not want that to occur.

With the questions being identical to one another ... you do have a point there. However, for the sake of time, I thought it would be easier. I would rather have the same question asked twice and have the respondent say "I believe I just answered that" than to have things drag out with the allowances made. We can do several rounds of questions, if the jurors need more clarification. I do have a three week old at home, I need to get home to her tonight to tend to her, along with my other responsibilities."

She sat back and thought about the timeline deadline, and if research was needed for one of the questions. An idea caught her. "If someone is asked something that they do not know about, and the question requires research, then could they not state for the record that "At this time, I do not know, but I would like to request to have the jury call upon so-and-so as a witness who would present the information for me"? That way ... they are acknowledging the question in the 24 hour time frame, the jury sees that the respondent is attempting to answer it, and that way they have more time to technically answer and get the proof they need without violating the charter. So long as they do not abuse this way of answering, meaning that they state that for every single question ... and I hope that they do not, since this trial has been in the works for a while, and I trust that the people have come here prepared today."

(ooc - I merely suggested this procedure since sometimes people only have a set time for coming on. I do not want this trial to be dragging too much. - /ooc)

[arthur_loxley]

The High Chancellor turned to Lord Artur and addressed his objections.

“My apologies, Lady Deerhurst, if I may? Lord Artur, as Prince Chris and Lady Revan have both said, we are bound to the 24 hour answering period by the procedures listed. I have scoured the document, but this particular rule seems water tight. The only feasible way that we could discern to address just such an issue as you mention of needing further clarification was to have several rounds of questions, whereby Lady Deerhurst will pose questions, answers will be received under a single, easily understood deadline, and then further questions will be sought from the jurors and so forth, until all questions are answered. It was truly the only way we could find to stay true to the procedure and to allow Lords Arthur and Elmix as much time as possible to answer. I assure you that you will have several opportunities to ask follow up or clarification questions after the initial answers, if such is desired.”

Jennet nodded at Prince Chris' statement about the procedure.

“There are several procedural issues that I believe need a bit of tweaking, as you say, after this hearing is concluded, when we can consider it on its own merits and not as an integral part of an ongoing trial.”

Returning to Lord Artur, she addressed him once more.

“My Lord, does this satisfy your objection, or are there further concerns that we need to address before going further?”

[arthur_loxley]

Lord Artur le Breton rises again,

My Lady High Chancellor, and fellow Triers, I accept the 24 hour limit for both accuser and accused to response to juror's questions, as these are written into procedure dictated by the Charter. I'd like to add that by the Trial by Peer procedure of the Charter of the House of Lords, this proceeding is already in violation of the charter as no public announcement of a chosen Chief Juror has been made before the greater House. My recollection of the Charter is that this was to be done before these proceedings ever opened in Chambers.
This example was what in an earlier statement I referred to as a lapse in following procedures.

That said, I see no time limit in the charter procedures on Lord and Lady Jurors forming their questions, nor any demand that they be submitted en mass as a concurrent selection of four questions at once. Therefore I must insist that as a Juror I be permitted to ask my questions to the parties before us serially, so that I might have a response to my first question before I present my second question to a party, and so on. Those questions I'd expect might need more time to consider or perhaps research I'd be willing to submit together, early. Those shorter questions that I feel could be answered while the party is before the bench without delay I would like to ask from the bench, in sequence, rather than being submitted in advance.

We are finders of fact as Triers in this Trial by Peer, with the reputations and standings of one or another Peer before us at risk. Let us not be seen as clock-watchers waiting impatiently to return to a fox hunt. Thank you.

He takes his seat.

[arthur_loxley]

I'd like to add that by the Trial by Peer procedure of the Charter of the House of Lords, this proceeding is already in violation of the charter as no public announcement of a chosen Chief Juror has been made before the greater House. My recollection of the Charter is that this was to be done before these proceedings ever opened in Chambers.
This example was what in an earlier statement I referred to as a lapse in following procedures.

If this is true then we need to follow protocols, we are here to make determination of our laws and we can not allow our responsibilities to be smeared afterwards because protocols were not followed.

A simple adjournment to make the announcement in the HoL is all that is required and we can continue.

What say we?

Darien looked quickly over at the Chief Juror and said "sorry m'lady for speaking out" and Darien waited to see what would happen next.

[arthur_loxley]

Jennet takes a moment and asks a page to distribute the most recent version of Section 7 of the House of Lords Charter, which governs Scandalum Magnatum hearings and waits a moment until all have had a chance to receive them. (OOC: Each of you has been sent a copy in your Forum 1 mail for reference.) She looks up and addresses Lord Artur.

My Lord Artur, now that we all have our copies to hand, would you please be so kind as to direct me to the section of the Charter to which you refer? I would be most grateful.

[arthur_loxley]

Receives the copy at hand of the procedure document and looking at it for a shor time puts in on the table and continues to sit quietly thinking.

[arthur_loxley]

Lord Artur studies the parchment distributed by the Lady High Chancellor carefully, going over the details line by line. With a studied frown to himself, he beckons the Clerk over and has a whispered word with that functionary. The Clerk then departs to the main body of the House of Lords, returning a few moments later with a shake of the head. With that, slowly, Lord Artur le Breton rises to speak to the panel with a turn to Lady Jennet.

My apologies, Lady High Chancellor, as it seems the issue that was on my mind is in fact beyond the scope of this panel, and should more correctly be addressed on the Floor of the House of Lords. It concerns matters regarding the Charter itself. With that in mind, I respectfully withdraw my motion of a point of order regarding the proper sequence of procedures within this chamber and accept without question for the furtherance of this trial the section 7 of the Charter of the House of Lords as distributed.

On the matter of submission of all questions in advance to the Chief Juror, I do not withdraw my protest though. Perhaps in the interest of time and precedent we proceed adopting the manner set in the Court of Appeals, with each member of the panel posing questions based on what the parties present before us individually. That is the precedent set in the Judiciary when a panel of judges is hearing testimony and inquiring regarding the facts before them, without any suggestion that only the Chief Justice is the one to present the questions to the parties being heard.

Again, I fear I've needlessly taken our panel's time regarding a separate issue that it outside the scope of this trial, and accept the calling to order itself as proper. I do humbly have questions I'd like to address to both parties before the panel now that opening statements are concluded, at such time the Chief Juror feels is appropriate.

[arthur_loxley]

Her face did not change at all as Lord Breton stood and made his comments, exercising control. "Sir, your protest is noted. May I bring up the point that while the Court of Appeal's manner in dealing with such cases is an excellent precedent, we do not have the same capabilities as they do there. These are two different courtrooms ... respondents have the ability to ask for an extension for a deadline in the CoA. We do not here. Meaning, if two jurors ask questions one right after another, and the respondent is so wrapped up in answering one that they forget the other and the deadline passes, that's it. If we are to go by the procedures, then ... well, what's the best term for it? The respondent would be "screwed".

My interest in suggesting the previous procedure was to ensure that both Lord Arthur and Lord Elmix have fair chances to not miss nor be confused by posting times - which can and will happen to everyone occasionally, I've been victim to it as well - which in a sense is part of my role as Chief Juror. It was not meant to cut anyone's opinion or need for clarification off, which if it were taken for so, I apologize."

She sighed and briefly reached for a glass of mead in a goblet in front of her. As her thirst was quenched, Revan found herself wishing that the mead would have been stronger so she could get through this. James warned you about this, she told herself, this type of stuff only leads to headaches. "Now ... I will ask the Lady Chancellor to confirm how we are continuing on, in terms of procedure, so we are not continuing to step on people's toes and we might actually come close to asking a question?"

[arthur_loxley]

Darien took the paper from the clerk with an updated copy of section 7 on it, dipping his head he read the document and then nodding his head to show he understood its content and happy no breach had happened in this instance he waited for proceedings to continue.

[arthur_loxley]

Then I would request that we proceed as the Charter itself states, that jurors ask questions of the parties. I say Jurors, and nowhere in the charter does it state through the Chief Juror alone. Namely,
vi. The jurors may ask questions which the principals have one full day to answer.

Madame Chief Juror, you proposed one way of handling it in an effort to perhaps simplify. If it had met consensus within the panel then that way could have been followed. It did not meet consensus as I have formally objected. Therefore the proposal must be discounted and the precedent of Trial by Peers as previously held before the House of Lords prevails. Having sat as a Juror twice before in such Trial by Peers and being acting chair of the Judicial Committee I am not without experience in these matters.

I now have my initial questions for Lord Elmix Degas and Lord Arthur Loxley when you're ready to begin.

Thank you.

[arthur_loxley]

Jennet sits quietly a moment, tapping her quill on the desk with a steady, thoughtful rhythm, considering Lord Artur's objection. In the interim, she directs a page to bring refreshment to those in the courtroom who desire it, and takes a goblet of cool water for herself, sipping delicately before she addresses the situation.

My Lord Artur, you yourself have expressed a concern about deadlines for answering and this concerned both myself and Lady Deerhurst as well. We all want to make sure that this hearing is as fair for both Lord Arthur and Lord Elmix as it can possibly be. Confusing multiple deadlines on the same day does not accomplish this. There is more than one way to handle this issue, though the solution presented by Lady Deerhurst seemed the most fair and expedient, balancing the need for clear deadlines and our desire to not put undue strain on either party, asking them to spend unreasonable amounts of time on the questions, while still acting within the confines of the Charter.

That being said, before I make my suggestions, I would ask for a point of clarification from yourself, if you would be so kind. Some of your words have given me pause and I wish to make perfectly sure that we are both in understanding on the issue. It seems that your primary objections are twofold. Firstly, you listed a desire to be able to ask your questions serially, so that you could hear a response to your initial question or questions before proceeding to subsequent questions, and so forth. Secondly, you address the words of the Charter, citing that there is no listed time limit for submitting questions nor a requirement that they be submitted en masse. To address your second concern first, I would agree. The Charter lists no timeframe for submissions, nor a limit on the number of questions, nor does it state that all questions for the hearing must be submitted at once. Thankfully, this is not what is being suggested, and here is where I am afraid there has been confusion.You desire to be able to ask your initial question or questions and then followup with subsequent questions as the trial commences or as new issues present themselves. I am in complete agreement. This is exactly what is proposed. For the first round of questions, Lady Deerhurst is asking you to submit those questions which you state that you already have in mind. She would then post them with a clear single deadline for both participants, therefore satisfying all of our minds that we had allowed them as much time as the Charter allows for their answers. Following this, Lady Deerhurst would ask for more questions, which you are free to submit to her. This would continue until we had reasonably exhausted all information for this hearing. I grew concerned at your phrasing, Lord Artur, that you objected based on the belief that you were being asked to submit every question that you had in mind before the answers were provided, but this is not so. You are perfectly free to submit your questions serially, or to ask new questions as they come to the foreground. We are only attempting to make absolutely sure that no one is disenfranchised by confusing multiple deadlines. Have I guessed correctly in this instance, or is there some further reason that you believe it would not be in the best interests of this hearing, and the two men whose lives will be effected by it, to proceed in this manner?

Jennet addresses the greater assembly of jurors and participants with an apologetic demeanor.

My lords and ladies, I apologize for this brief delay, and will attempt to get past this procedural hurdle as quickly as possible so that we might resume, which is in everyone's best interest.

[arthur_loxley]

Hearing as Lords speak about legal procedures and as he feel so nice and warm in his seat, Elmix closes his eyes and soon sleeps in. Nothing is as helpfull for a sleeping in as discussion about some legal procedures.

[arthur_loxley]

Darien watched Lord Elmix's reaction and in the pause between discussion spoke "I would remind Lord Elmix to show conduct becoming of a noble in this proceeding and not treat us all with scant disrespect, insubordinate actions from yourself do not and I repeat do not reflect kindly on one so experienced and of the military way such as yourself".

Darien motioned to the page to wake the man.

[Sponsored content]