Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Trial by Jury sort of

Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2013 12:20:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Basically, the game starts with a suspect in hand, a crime scene that has more or less been fully investigated, and a few stories and testimonies from various witnesses and people of interest. The prosecution and defense already have all of the information recovered.

The players are a few prosecutors, a few lawyers, and a suspect. The suspect has already been informed of whether or not they're guilty as have their lawyers.

Everyone is placed in a group PM for a sort of final interrogation. The suspect will also be placed in a separate PM with their lawyers for private delegation as will the prosecutors for talk of strategy. The point of this first scene is to recover any new evidence that might be obtained from the suspect as he has not been formally interrogated yet prior to this phase.

After this is over (I'm playing with the idea of either a time limit or mutual agreement between prosecution and defense to end), the game moves to the actual trial phase. This will be conducted in the Games forum with the prosecution, defense, suspect, and two new groups of players: the Judge (the mod if you will) and a number of members of the jury (I'm thinking five or six).

Members of the jury may submit questions or queries to either party to the case through a group PM with the Judge. The Judge may then interject at any moment to offer the relevant party a chance to respond to or answer the question.

After the trial phase is over (again either through a time limit or through mutual consent between parties), the jury will go through their delegation in a group PM. Verdicts must be unanimous. The prosecution obviously wins if the suspect is found guilty. The defense and suspect win if the suspect if found innocent.

What do you all think? Is this workable? I've only seen games where the prosecution has to sift through the crime scene and start from scratch so far.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
TheAntidoter
Posts: 4,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2013 12:23:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
You've got a point.

The last game ended in confusion because of a confusing scenario that we couldn't figure out.

There was a tent, a house, and the arctic circle, as well as people watching it.

We got frustrated, which turned into a (Very short) ad homeim fight between the mod and us, which ended the game in favor of prosecution even though they didn't have a suspect.
Affinity: Fire
Class: Human
Abilities: ????

Nac.

WOAH, COLORED FONT!
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2013 5:38:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'd love to take the role of the defending lawyer.

I'd personally promote the idea of majority rules on the court cases, as a unanimous decision is unlikely.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2013 5:43:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm up for it. I can be a jury member. I would go for lawyer, but Stephen would thrash me good.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2013 1:00:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/20/2013 5:43:12 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm up for it. I can be a jury member. I would go for lawyer, but Stephen would thrash me good.

Like I said, there would be multiple members of the prosecution and defense. I'm thinking three each.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2013 2:52:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/21/2013 1:00:05 PM, Noumena wrote:
At 2/20/2013 5:43:12 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm up for it. I can be a jury member. I would go for lawyer, but Stephen would thrash me good.

Like I said, there would be multiple members of the prosecution and defense. I'm thinking three each.

Personally I would promote the idea of multiple courts running at once, so everyone can be a prosecutor and lawyer, and everyone else can be witnesses, suspects and defendants in a case. That could give a lot more depth in the trial at hand... :)
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...