Trials in Waterdeep

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:32 pm

I think most will agree that we have a problem with those (trials in Waterdeep). It is generally hard to find an imm who has both the time and inclination to roleplay the magistrate for a trial to happen. At least, since the introduction of the bailing system, people do not have to rot down in the dungeon for extended periods of time, which is a positive change in my opinion. But, still, it would be good if some sort of trials could happen eventually.

Meting out the punishments decided after the trial would most likely not be done by mortals, but the trial itself and the roleplay could both be completed by mortals, with imm supervision/help when needed. For that to work, a group of magistrates would be needed. They could be normal characters who ICly become magistrates, or characters specially made for this role. The magistrates would then preside over the trials, hear both the defender (and those who would speak for him/her) and the prosecutor, debate about the right punishment (that's where having more than 1 magistrate is good, 2 can be a problem since you could have one "yes" and one "no" vote, 3 might work better) and announce it.

This is still only a project and being discussed. Feel free to input ideas about the system presented above, or an alternative system.

Gwain · Post by **Gwain** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:07 pm

As a rule make sure you never have an even number of magistrates so that you don't have situations where you get a tie. So you would need an uneven number to avoid it.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:16 pm

But... in our (US) country we have 12 jurers when there is a tie... they go over and revote after discussing it for a bit... but then again... having 12 magistrates is quite a large number... so for some less then 5... i guess having an odd number to give ruling would not be too bad...

I, for one, have not been in jail that I can recal... so I would not know the bad aspect of it. On the RP aspect of it. I would not mind viewing a public trile at all... a hanging every once in a while... tomatoes to throw

(Then again... i could not be quite understanding what you are talking about...)

Gwain · Post by **Gwain** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:27 pm

Well the idea of magistrate run courts that I can understand would be that they would adminster justice based on a trial and decide between themselves and if needed imm intervention what logical path to take. Those that are being placed in jail for special circumstances, outside of coded crimes like High Murder, extrodinary theft and civil unrest could not really be tried within the code and it would take a measure of rp'd ic judgement, I could be slightly off though.

In reference to my uneven number of judges, I was refering to ancient run court houses and councils.

Layna · Post by **Layna** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:49 pm

I'm pretty sure FK magistrates won't bear too much resemblance to 'RL' ones, but this is is a very brief summary of how it works in the UK (if this is any help at all)

Magistrates are non-salaried laymen appointed by the Crown on recommendation of the Lord Chancellor, advised by a local advisory committee. A Magistrates clerk, a solicitor or barrister, sits in front of the bench and advises magistrates on the law.

In my experience there have always been either three Magistrates or a county judge, who is a legal professional.

Magistrates hear minor offences and can only impose fines or prison sentences of up to six months for a single crime or 12 months for two more more crimes. Indictable offences must proceed to Crown Court where the Defendant faces trail by jury.

I could go on, but I won't - cause it's boring and probably highly irrelevant!

Anyway from the above, it seems to me that Magistrates (or Justices of the Peace as they're also known) could be picked from existing players, considered to be of good standing in the community. Of course, they'd need to bone up on the law, or have someone on hand that was familiar with it, cause it's always interesting when people get off on a technicality or some such

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:02 pm

At this point, everything is still possible.

It might be possible that a gathering be held with high-standing members from Waterdeep to craft a base set of laws that would then be used by the magistrates. The laws would most likely have to be inspired from (a) what existed in medieval times, (b) what can be found in fictions and "official" source books, and (c) they should be consistent with the rules taught to the Watch members. The laws would determine - to some extent - relations between crimes and punishment (or they could determine minimal and maximal punishments, and allow the magistrates to choose the exact punishment within those guidelines.

In my opinion, it would be better to try and base the system on something that existed in medieval times, or perhaps the old English system than what exists in the US.

Argentia · Post by **Argentia** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:19 pm

I would just like to go ahead and throw my incredible support towards this idea. =D There have been multiple occasions where there was a "crime" in WD but the coded justice system had no way to handle it. If there was a system like this in place at the those times, it would have made for some tremendously enjoyable times, I think. I also feel that PC magistrates and even defense lawyers and prosecuters would be really fun to play. Maybe you could hire any PC to be your lawyer, or even defend yourself, but the court could also have "default" or appointed lawyers if you choose not to hire one or defend yourself.(The drawback would be that you might get a dispassionate lawyer if you do not hire one yourself, or you could get a good one for free. It's a gamble. =D)

I can think of one specific example, which actually occured in Tethyr but I imagine WD might have a court system similiar to it. It is a story about a blight which ruined all the grapes of Tethyr, making the peasants unable to produce wine. When the king still demanded his usual tax of wine and the peasants couldn't provide it, the king sentenced them to death. An Ilmateri lawyer quickly came to their rescue and spoke on their behalf in court, saving them from being executed, but was sentenced to death himself for treason. So this sort of shows that adventurous PCs can be lawyers and have other positions too.

Yeah, I just really wanted to say that I love this idea and, if needed, would be willing to help in structuring it/setting it up if it's decided on.

Gregal · Post by **Gregal** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:12 pm

Alright, I am going to ask a question...Other cities, such as Westgate? What of their magistrates? Or their justice system? I mean I could see at least 3 from Westgate and 3 from Zhentil Keep. 5 though for Waterdeep.
I just don't want to see other cities go and everyone know they can do such events in other cities because there is no "real" roleplay. But otherwise I think this is a wonderful idea and will bring more roleplay to the game. It was one of the things that made me upset was when I was robbed and there was nobody icly to go to, and you had to go after the thief yourself which is frowned upon as chaotic. So I do hope this idea is implemented and followed through

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:23 pm

This is an idea I'm really fond of, for probably obvious reasons

However, with a multiple Magistrate system, or even a singular one, you must realize that people have real lives, and not everyone is always on at the same time. For Waterdeep, five active magistrates would be a nice number, where to run a trial, at least 3 must be present. If a fourth is, and a tie insues, then they should do a reconsider the eveidence and re-vote (I hate to require the 5th member to be present in the event of a 4 member tie, because if they, say, are on vacation for a few weeks, it slows things down).

Who should the five be? Well, looking from a view of a citizen of Waterdeep, the Lords obviously have the most influence, so they may be picked by them. Obviously, certain churches are going to try to influence the choices (somehow), as it effects them directly (some more than others). The church of Tyr, concerned with a fair and just system of Justice, is going to obviously want a say. But even other churches are going to want to influence who is chosen as well, for it may indeed effect their faithful.

Now, obviously the choice is OOCly going to be the immortal's call. However, how much power are we going to invest them? Just guilty/not-guilty rullings? Sentensing as well? Or a middleground? I think the middleground is the best path. Have a list of General laws (Theft, Murder Accidental, Murder Intentional, Assault, Assault on a Member of the Watch/Guard, Murder Multiple, ect), along with either a set punishment (for fairness), or a vairable range (as Dalvyn suggested, which I think would be the best choice) because not every case is the same. However, for the more intense punishments (death, exile, monitary costs to the offended of greater than a certain amount, jail time of longer than a certain amount) Immortal approval should be nessisary (in some IC form, perhaps a sort of High Offical who rules over the magistrates and is their link to the Faceless Lords of Waterdeep).

A great idea I think. This will even open up the possibilities for RPs! Players being Lawyers, Corruption of an Official, the public sitting in on a big name trial... And to top it all off, once implimented, makes life easier for the Immortals! One less thing they have to deal with means more time for the immortals to do their other duties, like RP!

Glim · Post by **Glim** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:35 pm

Hmm, concerns and questions I have towards this:

1. How much a certain magistrate's faith would biase his or her decision, or even just how even-handed a certain player might be, let alone his characters.

2. Sometimes it is hard to even organise 3 people on at the same time.

3. Is this just for Waterdeep or would we have magistrates for different cities. With heavily populated cities (player-wise) having more magistrates, while smaller cities might only have one.

Otherwise I think it is a great idea

Thank you

,

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:55 pm

Glim, from what I'm picturing... (which, seeing as this is in discussion, nothing is offical)

1 - As much as it ICly would. Obviously, a character who belives more in fairness and justice won't vote not-guilty just to get a friend off the hook on the stand. However, like I said, ICly, people are corruptable...

2 - Which is why I suggest make it a 5 member board of rather active people, when only 3 need to be on. Better chances, and hopefully the jails won't be so full that they're needed daily....

3 - I'm thinking, for a Start, just waterdeep. Maybe if it turns out to be what we all hope, they'll expand it to other cities as well. But with the playerbase centralized around Waterdeep, it makes a good starting point I think.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:58 am

well... we can appoint MANY people magistrates... but only have 5 people magistrate a person at a time...

almost like a ... a ... what do you call it...
jurry duty in the US

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:05 am

Possible, but how do we enforce a level of faireness? What if the person magistrating is a friend of the criminal?

Even Worse....

What if they hate the guts of an Innocent man wrongly accused?

That sort of system has enough flaws where I'm pretty sure Waterdeep would not have instated it. Though, it is a good idea for something else...

What about Magistrate terms? Are they for life? A Mud Year? 4 Mud years? An interesting possibility to be sure... Maybe even if you were judged to have been a fair and just magistrate, you get re-appointed term after term as long as they're satisfied with your job. Someone gets upset, they bring charges against YOU, and the other magistrates must rule on your fitness to maintain your post.

Possibilities.... Yes.... Many possibilities....

Nysan · Post by **Nysan** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:48 am

Courts ruled by man inherit the flaws of man.

The idea has merit, but I cannot see it in FK without some big IC and OOC issues, some of which have been stated in this thread already. A justice system controlled by players (mortals) is a big leap for FK. The obvious concerns of when who will be on, will they judge fairly, who would be choosen (ICly or OOCly) for the position, what will be the limitations of said players' power to punish, ect ect. This idea, if put into place, will walk the fine line between neat RP idea and possible player abuse/favortism. Would definately be a neat RP angle but I worry about possible problems it may create.

Raona · Post by **Raona** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:28 am

I have to agree with Nysan's concerns, but point out that the current system is somewhat binary and doesn't allow for much RP with actual bearing on the verdict and sentence without a lot of IMM effort. So there's a lot to be potentially gained with a new system, and I think it worth a try.

I appreciate Layna's overview of the British position of magistrate, and it inspires me to suggest the following:

Magistrates (or whatever title we use for them) would be the detectives, lawyers, and legal advisors to the officers of the court, who would remain in IMM hands. That is, they would seek to collect evidence, determine probable cause, hear testimony, and prepare briefs for the court, usually including a recommendation. However, an IMM would read said brief, and decide (and impose) sentence, holding a trial if they believe it warranted and the suspect pleads "not guilty."

"Magistrate" may be an elevated position within the Watch, or external to it. In either case, they would be able to:
* ask questions in an official capacity, keeping official records of testimony, travelling the lands to interview witnesses
* upon agreement of x number of "magistrates," charge a PC with suspicion of a crime - which would then require the suspect appear before a magistrate to give testimony, or risk (via "magistrate" request to an IMM) imprisonment for contempt (and thus leaving them little to do in their jail cell other than answer questions, though they could still choose not to do so if that's what they are about IC).
* seek out the testimony of character witnesses, as well as material witnesses, though witnesses could choose not to testify, or to do so "off the record" (their identity sancrosanct upon the "magistrate"'s honor)
* write a recommendation for the court, summarizing the crime, evidence, and, where they arrive at a relevant opinion, suggesting a verdict and possibly a sentence
* Hear and consider the pleas of a convicted felon seeking parole, amnesty, the hearing of an appeal, or other consideration, and similarly make a recommendation to the court on such matters.

I think this system would allow for new and interesting roleplay, as well as actually lift some burden off the IMMs with respect to investigating criminal complaints; it may also improve law enforcement.

However, I should also point out a few limitations that come to mind:
1) Having no access to logs, "magistrates" could not interview MOBs. Often, this is critical to crime investigation.
2) Being mortal, PC's could easily be misled, or just plain "get it wrong." I see a great deal of temptation in "framing" people: this would hurt the aspiring lawful, unjustly framed and accused, far more than it would imperil those unlawfuls doing the framing. Thus IMMs would have to decide how much to look in to the accuracy of a magistrate report, and whether to let a bad report be implemented as an IC reality. Problem is, most punishements are also rather OOC. I am aware of several PC's who have dropped characters that have been handed harsh IC sentences. (In IC life, that's not an option, but on FK, it is an OOC reality.)
3) The difficulty of bringing people together remains, particularly if a single "magistrate" is assigned to a case. Perhaps an OOC channel (PM's?) could be allowed for conducting inquiries, questioning witnesses by letter, perhaps? This is in direct opposition to the OOC mandate on PM's, however, so I raise it with caution.

Just for the record, I'm a chemist, not a lawyer, so this may be all quite daft or legally unworkable - I'm open to that possibility!

Raona · Post by **Raona** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:29 am

To make it easier to discuss this, perhaps a few concrete examples:

Gorkin the Buff is a new player. He mistakenly gets into a fight with a MOB, and doesn't know how to cut it off before killing same. "Magistrate" questions Gorkin, gets his side, and explains that he will seek leniency from the court. Writes a report suggesting an OOC explanation of what to do in the future for Gorkin's player (which the magistrate writes), and release with time served.

Shadow the Quick is a theif with an experienced player. He spots Goldie the Rich, a merchant, with a very nice item in his cart, and proceeds to steal it. Goldie spots Shadow, but does not catch him. Goldie reports crime to a "magistrate," who takes down official record of complaint and seeks to contact Shadow or acquaintances of same, saying that he is wanted for questioning. Although several acquantances are informed of this, Shadow does not come in for questioning, so said "magistrate" discusses evidence with two other "magistrates" and obtains a warrant, making Shadow an official subject of the investigation, wanted for questioning. When Shadow next enters the city, he is apprehended by the watch and put in jail, where he languishes until the "magistrate" logs in and then goes to question him (perhaps via PM?). Shadow denies all wrongdoing. "Magistrate" seeks other witnesses, but can find none. Also seeks the stolen item, but finds no word of it. Interviews several character witnesses about Shadow, who say he's sweet as pie. "Magistrate" can do no more, writes a report suggesting that Shadow be searched, then a trial be held. Possible outcomes:
1) Shadow has item in his inventory (the fool!). IMM guard "finds" it, and Shadow pleads guilty in court
2) Shadow has (intelligently) already pawned off item. Trial is held (IC, or by PM?) and it's Shadow's word against Goldie's. Shadow is found innocent on the strength of his character witnesses, and Muahahaha's all the way back to Westgate (after showing appropriate humility while still in the court)

Weasely the Dwarven Smith has promised to make The Incredible Titanium Fishnet Stockings for Glitter the Orc-Bashing Sunite. Glitter pays 15 platinum up front. A year later, Weasely still hasn't delivered, and is ignoring Glitter's request for a refund, if not the promised items. Glitter complains to a "magistrate" (also attempting to seduce him). "Magistrate" talks with Weasely, who is uncooperative. "Magistrate" contacts the Dwarven council (files a report), warning of the possible breach of contract and the negative repurcussions upon Dwarven trade reputation. Dwarven council (IMM) summons Weasely to Mithril Hall, where he denies the accusation under oath. Dwarven counsel accepts this (at possible cost to the reputation of dwarven trade).

On a related note, I was lining up defense and prosecution lawyers for the trial of a player seeking an appeal of his sentence (before, it seems, the player dropped the PC). It seems these folks could be anyone, but that "magistrates" might be particularly good choices, and possibly the default court-appointed lawyer for those without an advocate-in-waiting.

Also, perhaps "magistrate" reports could be posted as a matter of public record, so that the populace might know of the workings of the law. Some people love to read the police reports in the paper...

Lerytha · Post by **Lerytha** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:53 pm

Could we open up a semi-imm position, for people who are solely meant to RP magistrates/lawyers, etc? For example, the imms might not be able to get together to hear a case, etc, so set up a group of people who want to be magistrates. They can be given an imm file with maybe enough commands to "enter" legal mobs.

With a team of five "justic half-imms" that could inhabit any magistrate/legal figure in any area, this would mean that justice would be swift and would be RPed properly. Also, it would cut aside IC bias, because people would not be RPing as their own characters, but as MOBs. Of course, I'm not sure whether you can have an imm that is just allowed to enter MOBS, or whether they have to have all the commands.

But it's a suggestion, nonetheless.

~Ol

Gregal · Post by **Gregal** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:41 pm

Due to my wonderful flight, I got to read up on some of my player books. I would like to point out that even high officials in Tyr let people go off easy as a warning, and keep books on what that person has done. Also it is said that Merchants are very influencial in the courts of the Lands. I would have to say opening up a semi-imm position is really just sad, no offense because I see this as more beauocracy, or however you spell it. And the game already has too much of it, and we are having to always apply for certain stuff and can't just roleplay it out. I would have to say if your character is chosen to be a magistrate it is because they have influence in the city. And of course they can be bought off. That is the favour of Waukeen, deals under the table...done in secrecy would allow Sharites to get involved. This is where faiths can come into this player run rp. And if the gods want to get involved then they can...because it is their portfolio, so what I suggest instead of making more "positions" rp....and let it happen. I personally don't think the imms want to have to worry about more positions, but it is player rp that will decide said trials, and so its rp. I can say this...When sephany was in jail, I tried to set up a player into tricking her to lie against sephany, and by proving the lie making her look bad then making Sephany look good by making her look bad....if that makes sense. Manipulate the system, it works...so that is my piece.

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:44 pm

Personally, I doubt the Half-imm suggestion shale be given much weight. It just seems like an awfully lot of power to give to a Player... The ability to jump into mobs. But, hey, its a suggestion, and this is my opinion. Only time will show what does and doesn't end up in effect.

However, the issue with PCs being unable to access logs brings light to a possible issue. That issue being, PC magistrates could only interview other PCs as witnesses for a crime, not the many NPCs that could potentially have seen it, without IMM interfearence. A lot of people fail to realize that Mobs are only a fraction of the amount of ACTUAL NPCs that exist inside a city, in theory. So even if it looks like 'the coast is clear', you could still (in theory) be seen by a mob...

Now, perhaps... Just perhaps... This may be a solution.

As it is now, there are codes floating around that if PCs get seen by mobs doing certain things, they cry and shout and people come running. The Magistrates could petition (in e-mail format, perhaps, or with a specail message board, either in game or on here) for the logs of a crime. This still requires some IMM intervention, but much less than before, as the Imm will not be required to RP the whole trial.

Under most cases of crimes against a Mob, a trial is largely unnessisary thanks to the justice system. The sentense is pretty cut and dry, and may only include the magistrates for sheer RP purposes. For Crimes against PCs, where a PC plays the roles of both sides, the witnesses are likely to be PCs as well. This is where the RP of a whole full blown trial come into play (ranging from simple trial and setensing, to corruption, and the like).

Now...

The original discussion called for simple PCs to oversee the trials so Imms don't have to. By having immortals prove logs (when nessiary), this keeps their involvement to a minimum (I have no idea how difficult it is to find logs, but they would have to have done it anyways, so at least they don't have to do the rest), which would help lessen the amount of time from crime to trial, and trial to sentense.

Just an addition two cents, however...

Maybe, if 5 magistrates get appointed, the number needed to be present will depend on the crime?

Theft - 1 must be present
High Murder - 3 must be present
Treason against Waterdeep - 4 (or 5, as much as I dislike needed to require ALL five of them) must be present

As an example, of course.

Gorwin · Post by **Gorwin** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:54 pm

Well I do not know about currently, but wouldn't the job of magistrates fall upon the shoulders of the City Watch. I know we used to have a few Pc members of it.

Trials in Waterdeep

Trials in Waterdeep

Perhaps the British Model?

Some concrete examples

Yah

trials