-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Nikhil Hearing* Details Thread
- Thread starter lord_of_darkness
- Start date
- Status
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
There should neither be a restriction on the number of witnessess nor the number of questions, it is unfair and should be unconstitutional. How is it fair on either party, if they cannot call as many witnessess or ask as many questions as they need to present their case?
Don't we want to get this over-and-done-with in one go? Please don't put these restrictions on both parties, as the last thing we need is a lengthy appeal process.
Don't we want to get this over-and-done-with in one go? Please don't put these restrictions on both parties, as the last thing we need is a lengthy appeal process.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd like to give in to all these demands of unlimited this and that, but the fact is that we don't have an unlimited amount of time. This hearing must not drag on for weeks upon months.
If an unlimited number of questions are allowed, then a witness can technically be questioned for months at a time. That's not what we're looking for. Besides, aside from 'leading the witness' why would there possibly be a need for more than 10 questions?
Also, I'm all but certain that there are no more than 5 relevant witnesses for each party. If either side can state categorically otherwise then it will be reviewed. Categorically does not mean "believe me, there are" or any such speculatory nonsense.
That's a total of 40 questions, where a question such as "If so why?" would constitute part of a question. Why would there be any need for more?
If an unlimited number of questions are allowed, then a witness can technically be questioned for months at a time. That's not what we're looking for. Besides, aside from 'leading the witness' why would there possibly be a need for more than 10 questions?
Also, I'm all but certain that there are no more than 5 relevant witnesses for each party. If either side can state categorically otherwise then it will be reviewed. Categorically does not mean "believe me, there are" or any such speculatory nonsense.
That's a total of 40 questions, where a question such as "If so why?" would constitute part of a question. Why would there be any need for more?
Mister Wright
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Well, if you are asking a series of questions that are leading to a predicted outcome, but the witness throws you a curveball, you should be able to then follow that line of questioning. It would seem a bit silly to stop a prosecutor or a defendant asking questions when they are needed. Then, those questions may lead to the need to call a witness not originally intended. There needs to be allocation for this. I'm not saying that either team will be asking more than 10 quesitons or calling more witnessess, but they shouldn't be limited.Mr Mxyzptlk said:
Perhaps the judge is the best person to adjudicate on this matter during the preceedings.
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
"Defence or prosecution may appeal for further questions if necessary. These will be granted at the discretion of the moderating party (CWBCC) pending their need."Mister Wright said:
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Depends on the date confirmed by the prosecution.NikhilN said:
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ease up. There are nicer ways to put such a point across. I do agree with the point though.Nnanden said:
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
the week before christmas? great....
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
along with the jury and judges anyway. ofcourse if you want to run this out over its course and do it when we are not avaliable nikhil will be able to have an appeal based on inadequate representation... . thats ofcourse if you want to drag it ourt even farther than necessary...
Mr Mxyzptlk
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If needs be, the hearing will recess from the 23rd to the 27th.
age_master
Hall of Fame Member
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
its more the 25th to the 1st that im worried about (though im sure the court would be closed the 26th, 27th and 28th anyways as they are public holidays)
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
Why the need for jurors, witnesses, and numerous defence and prosecution lawyers?
As someone said, it's a sentencing - having sat through a couple for work, all that happens is the prosecution gives a suggested sentence, highlighting the aggravating factors - followed by the defence, which highlights the mitigating factors.
The judge then decides on the sentence using the information before him including a summary report.
I suppose you have your procedures set in place, but it all seems a bit unnecessary - his guilt has been determined, it's a simple matter of sentencing.
As someone said, it's a sentencing - having sat through a couple for work, all that happens is the prosecution gives a suggested sentence, highlighting the aggravating factors - followed by the defence, which highlights the mitigating factors.
The judge then decides on the sentence using the information before him including a summary report.
I suppose you have your procedures set in place, but it all seems a bit unnecessary - his guilt has been determined, it's a simple matter of sentencing.
- Status