| 1 |
Raymond Jennings schrieb: |
| 2 |
> That is another thing. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> If things are kept secret, how will the "accused" know on what basis |
| 5 |
> to make their appeals? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I wrote this in a previous post already, but I'll state it again. The |
| 8 |
process does not work like in a court. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
There is only prosecution (ComRel) and in case of appeal, a jury |
| 11 |
(Council). There is no defense. The accused will not see the evidence, |
| 12 |
and thus not be able to review or challenge it. For example, whether any |
| 13 |
communication presented was complete or taken out of context. There is |
| 14 |
also no way to find out for the accused whether misconduct was involved |
| 15 |
by any party. Ian hinted so in his response to the other thread. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The consequence of this is that the whole process is heavily stacked |
| 18 |
against the accused, and intentionally so. This can be a good or a bad |
| 19 |
thing depending on your perspective, but this is how the rules currently |
| 20 |
are. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Best regards, |
| 24 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
Archives