Dr Archeville Posted June 20, 2009 Author Posted June 20, 2009 One has not yet been given (though the layout will be that of a fairly standard court room, as seen on numerous tv shows & movies). EDIT: Ah, here's a basic pic Knievel would be "Defendant."
quotemyname Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 Master Plan: Throw defendant table at audience! Rudimentary, but it should work :)
Dr Archeville Posted June 21, 2009 Author Posted June 21, 2009 Once I get (sufficient) answers from Avalon, I will start this up.
Avalon Posted June 22, 2009 Posted June 22, 2009 Sorry everyone, I've been really busy with school work. Hopefully things will clear up by tomorrow.
Avalon Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 Okay, here it goes... It really does seem that it could do without the Commander part. It just sounded good, that's all. Now his Concealment is an spell he uses to emulate what he felt being essentially a formless spirit trapped in that tomb in the Middle East (that's some background stuff that I have to elaborate upon sometime soon) and lacking any sensation whatsoever. He twists that now so that is how everyone else percieves him (or doesn't). He is essentially doesn't exist in anyone's perception until he strikes. The rest of the powers aside from the teleport are some of the skills The Warrior of the Countless Blade has picked up in his time training (also something needed to be fleshed out sometime soon). Is that enough of an explanation Doc? Also, the concealment makes his teleport subtle too right?
Dr Archeville Posted June 23, 2009 Author Posted June 23, 2009 Nope, and I'm not allowing the Teleport, since you failed to explain how it fits (and it's more than a bit cheezy anyway). Cyroa, I'm gonna say Dark Star cannot detect Vestige. Have an HP for the setback. I'll try to post IC tonight and get this moved along.
Cyroa Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 That sucks... was hoping the enhancement was worthwhile. Ah well! (makes for a more explosive battle when things do come to a head) So if no concealed teleport, should he report his 'entrance'? otherwise, won't we see him anyway?
Dr Archeville Posted June 23, 2009 Author Posted June 23, 2009 Ah, I should have specified: I'm not allowing the "Affects Others" part on the Teleport. And yes, the Concealment effectively gives it Subtle 1.
quotemyname Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 Awww... Guess that means I won't be getting 'ported out! Oh well, we'll just have to do things the fun way :twisted:
angrydurf Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 Just wanted to check if I could add Ace in here or not. I mentioned intrest int he campaign discussion thread but we had quite a few people in there and I haven't seen his name come up here yet. Wasn't sure if Scarab or I nabbed the last spot.
Dr Archeville Posted June 23, 2009 Author Posted June 23, 2009 Go ahead and add yourself in, since I've no idea where Shaen's gotten to.
Dr Archeville Posted June 24, 2009 Author Posted June 24, 2009 I lied -- I must confer with the other Refs on something before continuing.
N/A Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 Sorry for the delay. When the trial begins, Elena Guerrero will be sitting at the Plaintiff's Table, with the D.A. and his team o' lawyers. She'll be whispering advice, giving hand signals, that sort of thing. It can be assumed that Telepathy is the active slot of her array unless I state otherwise. She'll be scanning and probing people, verifying testimony, figuring out potential biases of prospective jurors and strategies of opposing counsel, etc. Let me know what rolls you need from me, if any. Elena is assuming that Knieval's lawyer will attempt to subvert the legal process any way he can, and she's making it her personal mission to undermine those efforts.
Cyroa Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 This may be completely off topic and not belong here but it brings up an interesting legal point. Is telepathy on an unaware or unconsenting personal legal? Without a "warrant", I'd guess no. At the least it could be considered a serious violation of privacy. At most, possibly a form of rape. And if it is is indeed illegal when not authorized, that certainly means any information gain from it is inadmissible in court and possibly grounds for a mistrial... And if it is legal, then the 'subject' would know who the telepath in question is, right? The whole "right to face your accusers" thing. And a step beyond that, who watches the telepath to make sure they aren't going beyond what they are 'allowed' to do? Or lying? Who watches the watchers? Sorry, was feeling a little thoughtful this morning...
Dr Archeville Posted June 25, 2009 Author Posted June 25, 2009 Telepathy's treated mostly the same as wiretapping in FC.
quotemyname Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 "Who watches the watchmen" much? lol sorry just had to throw that one out there. I agree with the part about the telepathy and needing a warrant. If it is being treated like wiretapping, then it does need a warrent (at least by US law.) Unless you are calling the patriot act on me. But while Knievel could be considered a terrorist, I still don't think that even applies because that section of the patriot act is use to acquire information on terrorist for use with charging them with a crime and being able to arrest them. Knievel is already behind bars as it were. Therefore that section of the patriot act does not apply. (Don't ask... I did a 20 page research paper on the damn thing...) If Scarab is discovered as using telepathy to aid the prosecution without a warrant, then this should be declared a mistrial. Is her telepathy subtle? Would someone know if she was prying into their heads as she did it? Or would it just be a case of "Someone is reading your thoughts but you don't know who it is."? I am admittedly not very familiar with Telepathy rules. Being AFB and at work does not help at all... But those are just my thoughts. EDIT: My understanding of the order of major criminal trials is this: 1. Opening statement [prosecution] 2. Opening statement [defense] 3. Witness/Expert presentation/testimony [prosecution] 4. Witness/Expert cross-examination [defense] 5. Repeat steps 3 & 4 until the prosecution is out of witnesses 6. Witness/Expert presentation/testimony [defense] 7. Witness/Expert cross-examination [prosecution] 8. Repeat steps 6 & 7 until the defense is out of witnesses 9. Closing statement [defense] 10. Closing statement [prosecution] (the home team bats last) 11. Jury deliberation/Eventual verdict Many times judges will call for a recess for at least an hour after step 5 and step 8. If there are any particular shocking or stunning revelations, that may put either the defense or the prosecution in a particularly bad spot, they may request that the judge call for an extended recess up to and including delaying the trial to the following day. This is not a 24 hour break, the trial should resume at the same time as the trial originally started. For the most part I would like to default the actions of Ace Wright to Dr Archeville's control. He is an NPC, (and doesn't even have stats). He should be run by a judge, not myself. I would like to hand him over to the good doctor's control right after I make just one more post...
N/A Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 I'd say telepathy is probably worth even less than wiretapping. Wiretapping results in a recording that can be played back for anyone to hear. A recording that can be analyzed by experts on both sides to make sure it hasn't been tampered with. Telepathy results in still having to take the psychic's word for it. Elena is trying to aid the prosecution indirectly. That's the key word. She's doing things that could conceivably be explained away in mundane terms. Knowing when someone is lying, for instance. She's guiding the prosecution, not leading them around by the nose. "No, I don't like that juror. Don't pick him." "Ask that question this way, that'll trip them up." "That witness is lying. She does know who ate the last slice of pizza." That sort of thing. Yes, it would technically be illegal if she was caught. Just like it's technically illegal to lie on the witness stand or suppress evidence, even though it happens all the time and it's almost certainly going to happen here. Again - her goal is to undermine the defense's attempts to subvert the system, not to undermine the system itself. If you're still having trouble seeing the picture I'm trying to paint, rent The Devil's Advocate and Runaway Jury. And yes, her Telepathy is Subtle. And Mental (obviously). It wouldn't do well for her secret ID if her eyes started glowing in the middle of the courtroom.
Dr Archeville Posted June 25, 2009 Author Posted June 25, 2009 Assuming I am not banished to some pseudonatural realm, I shall make a semi-lenghty IC post tonight.
N/A Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 My understanding of the order of major criminal trials is this: 1. Opening statement [prosecution] 2. Opening statement [defense] 3. Witness/Expert presentation/testimony [prosecution] 4. Witness/Expert cross-examination [defense] 5. Repeat steps 3 & 4 until the prosecution is out of witnesses 6. Witness/Expert presentation/testimony [defense] 7. Witness/Expert cross-examination [prosecution] 8. Repeat steps 6 & 7 until the defense is out of witnesses 9. Closing statement [defense] 10. Closing statement [prosecution] (the home team bats last) 11. Jury deliberation/Eventual verdict Many times judges will call for a recess for at least an hour after step 5 and step 8. If there are any particular shocking or stunning revelations, that may put either the defense or the prosecution in a particularly bad spot, they may request that the judge call for an extended recess up to and including delaying the trial to the following day. This is not a 24 hour break, the trial should resume at the same time as the trial originally started. Don't forget jury selection! Before the trial even begins, both lawyers get input as far as who gets on the jury and which prospective jurors get excluded. Sometimes, the battle is won or lost before the opposing armies even take the field...
Geez3r Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 The existence of superhumans has created volumes of law and legal precedent over the years. The salient points of superhuman law for Freedom City campaigns are: 1. Offensive super-powers are considered weapons, and using a power against someone is generally considered aggravated assault unless the individual is acting in self-defense or to prevent a crime. 2. Superheroes do not have to follow criminal procedures unless they are members of a police force or other law-enforcement agency. Among other things, this means superheroes don’t need to read a criminal his rights when making a “citizen’s arrest.†3. Superheroes can be charged with “excessive force†if they use more than the minimum force required to disable or restrain opponents. This is most often invoked in the case of violent vigilantes who kill or maim criminals. 4. Costumed identities are recognized as legal entities, allowing costumed superhumans to engage in commerce, testify in court, or be sued without revealing their alternate identity. 5. Superhumans are public figures, subject to the same sort of media coverage as other public figures. 6. The use of Super-Senses and powers like Telepathy can be considered a violation of the Fourth Amendment prohibition against “unreasonable searches.†No one can be forced to submit to a telepathic scan, and evidence acquired solely through extrasensory means is not admissible in court. 6 is the one we care about here, though you can be sure I'll be using 3 and 4 for Malice's defense. Also, in regards to the legal process, there is also a pre-trial which acts ;like a meeting of the minds. This is where the defense and the prosecution come together to discuss the particulars of the case, and mutually agree on what and what did not occur, so as not to tie up the court's time agreeing with one another.
quotemyname Posted June 25, 2009 Posted June 25, 2009 I see what you did there shaen >_> I see your point, and know where you are going with this. You're saying that since your not actually presenting any of the information you have gained through telepathy as evidence then it is not going to count as evidence and thus item #6 from Geez3r's list should not apply. I disagree, because in court any information or knowlege attained by any member of either the prosecution or the defense (this includes police officers as well as legal advisers) must be examined by a judge. Then again, you're telepathy is subtle. Just know that if someone finds out what you're doing, I expect it to raise a big stink. It will probably result in a mistrial since it will become apparent that the prosecution has been receiving illegal 'coaching' through the whole trial. Now I just need to find a way to discover the use of your powers :P
Dr Archeville Posted June 25, 2009 Author Posted June 25, 2009 I had a rather illuminating chat with FC PbP's own legal expert the other night: (23:21:42) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) hey! Mind answering a few really, really, really basic trial questions? (23:21:55) Electra: (whispers) Sure, no problem (23:23:07) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) okay, first question: when the trial starts, and opening statements are made, who signals for them to start? Who says "you may present your opening statement"? The judge, or some other ofiicial? (23:24:20) Electra: (whispers) Just to be clear on where we are, this is in the actual trial phase of a criminal trial we're talking about? (23:24:46) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) yes, the part that'd be shown on most court tv shows and comics (23:26:02) Electra: (whispers) State court or federal? (23:26:37) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) I'm going with federal, given the scope of Captain Knievel's crimes (23:27:29) Electra: (whispers) The thing is, a federal court is way less dramatic than a state court might be. Federal prosecutors win more than 95% of their cases. (23:28:11) Electra: (whispers) If it goes to trial, it's because their case is absolutely airtight, and it's mainly a matter of just showcasing it. There is absolutely no room for any histrionics, any reaction for the peanut gallery, not nothing. (23:28:46) Electra: (whispers) Federal court is like taking the solemnity of state court, which is pretty solemn and formal to start with, and ratcheting it up a dozen notches. It's hardcore jurisprudence. =) (23:29:23) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) oh, there's no doubt that they won't win this case. The only real thing in question is whether or not Knievel manages to break out/is broken out by another before he's sent to Blackstone (23:29:34) Electra: (whispers) But to answer the question you actually asked, the judge is responsible for controlling all the proceedings. If there are no motions after opening statements, the judge will direct the prosecutor to bring on his first witness. (23:30:04) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) thankee (23:30:23) Electra: (whispers) Oh, and the other thing about Federal court is that it's even longer than State court. If Kneivel didn't comment his crimes at least three years ago, he ain't coming to court yet. (23:31:26) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) ... why? (23:32:42) Electra: (whispers) Because the procedure is just arduous. Even if, as I'm assuming, he's guilty of federal crimes and it's not a removal from the state court, it takes many, many months just to get onto the docket. (23:33:05) Electra: (whispers) Remember that for every, oh, fifty state courthouses, there is one federal courthouse. (23:33:56) Electra: (whispers) Then there's the motion practice stage, where the lawyers fight back and forth over the disclosures of information and what can be admitted and suppressed at trial. Federal court has long deadlines, so that drags on. (23:34:12) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) so... you're saying having him be tried two days after being arrested is a stretch? (23:34:19) Electra: (whispers) And there's plea negotiations, and someone's always going to ask for at least one continuance. (23:34:52) Electra: (whispers) ... He has a right to be seen by a judge within two days of his arrest, but that's just for a preliminary arraignment. (23:35:28) Electra: (whispers) There is no possible way, even with superlawyers, that he is going to trial two days after arrest. =) (23:36:54) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) well, he is here, b/c the other option is to have him break out before any trial. Which the Refs don't want. But we don't want him to not be able to play, either. (23:38:02) Electra: (whispers) You just can't have a trial two days after an arrest. It's the grossest of malpractice on both sides. Everyone would be disbarred. (23:39:10) Electra: (whispers) He might possibly be able to cop a plea deal within that time, but even that's a stretch. The justice system is not designed to work on a scale of days. (23:40:00) Electra: (whispers) You couldn't even assemble a jury pool in that amount of time. (23:40:35) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) well, it sorta has to here, since otherwise you'll have arrested villain PCs sitting in jail waiting for trial... which won't happen, b/c they'll break out (b/c the player wants to play). Which means there'll never be a trial for PC villains. (23:42:27) Electra: (whispers) I think you're going to have to make your own rules, then. Your attorneys won't even have had time to write opening statements, let alone present them. =) (23:43:08) Electra: (whispers) But with no jury, no speeches, no evidence, and no witnesses, it will at least be a very short trial. =) (23:43:57) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) why wouldn't there be evidence or witnesses? (23:44:40) Electra: (whispers) Because there's no time to have the subpoenas served or the chain of evidence authenticated. (23:45:57) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) well.... here, there is. Somehow. Since, otherwise, there'll never be a trial for any PC. (23:46:59) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) and I'd prefer not to just scrap the thread (23:48:03) Electra: (whispers) The thing is, you can have a trial this way, but if your defense attorney has the sense of a first year law student, he or she will be screaming down the place with a whole stack of objections about the defendant's lack of any hope of meaningful counsel. It's a trial that would be thrown out in any circuit without a second thought. (23:48:24) Electra: (whispers) Which is why I will be staying away from the thread. =) (23:48:51) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) which seems to be another way of saying No PC Ever Gets Tried. (23:50:20) Electra: (whispers) What I'm saying is that having a trial and having no PC stay in jail more than two days are incompatible goals under a justice system that is not, say North Korea. (23:51:23) Electra: (whispers) Put it this way. I once had a PC who committed a crime. She was under the influence of hostile magic, turned herself in, cut a plea, yadda yadda. I expedited things absolutely as much as I thought could be within the realm of plausibility. She was in jail three weeks. (23:55:23) Electra: (whispers) This site is pretty good just for describing trial procedure: http://www.essortment.com/all/cr​iminaltrialp_rmga.htm (23:55:39) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) yes, I understand that. But you do see my problem? That there needs to be some way to show that there are downsides to being a villain, like prison... which (based on my admittedly limited understanding) they can't get to w/out a trial. But if it takes so very long to set up a trial, most PC villains will be gone long before their day in court. (23:56:09) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) ooh, neat link, thanks (23:56:36) Electra: (whispers) You would think that if they go to the trouble of arresting villains, they have somewhere to hold them that they can't break out of. AA showed me this neat PDF of a villain prison book. (23:57:44) Electra: (whispers) The timeline is all over the place anyway. Can't you just say that he goes to jail for a couple of months, while both sides are working feverishly to prepare this super-expedited trial? (00:02:38) Electra: (whispers) Also, question... if prison is supposed to be a downside of being a villain, where does the supposition come from that he will be out before you can say bobsyeruncle? That's not exactly a downside so much as an opportunity to maim some public servants and thumb one's nose at the system. (00:02:57) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) I'd prefer not to, since that'd remove all possibility of Knievel showing up at the crater where Malice's house was. (And the Timeline is not all over the place, y'all are .) And, yes, there is a super-prison, but where are folks who would be sent to maximum security prisons held before trial, in the max sec prison, or somewhere else? (00:04:18) Electra: (whispers) Criminals are normally held in jail to await trial, but in a superpowered world, I would simply assume that there is a wing of the super-prison for those awaiting trial. It's much more likely than trying to make a reinforced wing of every county jail. (00:04:22) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) villains break out of prison -- it's what they do. Not saying there's 100% chance he will, but it is typiclaly what happens. But to thumb their nose at the system, there should be some evidence that there is a system to thumb one's nose at. (00:06:13) Electra: (whispers) If you can't keep a villain incarcerated longer than two days without him scarpering, you ain't got much of a system. =) (00:09:47) Dr_Archeville: (whispers to Electra) the presence of absence of (00:10:25) Electra: (whispers) Absolutely not! If you can't have a fair trial because (00:10:56) Electra: (whispers) If you have more procedural questions, PM me and I will try to keep the editorial comments to a minimum. =)
Recommended Posts