Sigil: City of Doors

(hey all! I'm not too sure how to start this, but I'll just give it a go - I'm thinking everyone post a brief introduction to their character then the Judge start the proceedings. I would imagine that the judge is a DM)
-----

There is a place in the Lady's Ward near the intersection of Advocate's Row and Razorvine on Hidleton, which stands apart from from the Prison and the Barracks. The cobbled road abruptly gives rise to a long flight of stairs crafted from alabaster marble. Columns of a colossal diameter support a triangular roof. The front courtyard boasts a gigantic silver sculpture of the Scales of Justice.

Enter the City Court.

Undoubtedly, cutters from across the multiverse have been on trial here for countless charges ranging from embezzlement to attempted genocide. The law is not quite perfectly upheld here (indeed, it would take a bureaucracy of modrons to accomplish that…and who really wants that?), but very nearly in measure – a cutter can be sure that he or she will get as fair a hearing here as just about anyplace else in the multiverse.

Outside one of the trial chambers, a group of reporters have gathered, scribbling notes and speaking into sounding stones. Above the cacophony stand two heavily armored bashers recognized as members of the Red Death. Inside is a fairly large sized courtroom, the classy and sparse decorations parallel the architecture of the building which houses it. From one of the side chambers enter three individuals: two harmonium elite guards and the shackled cutter to go on trial: Ceszar.

The plain white linen that now covers his ebony skin seems unbecoming of the man often seen wearing flamboyant clothing and a feathered hat. His purple eyes, which seem unusually dull at the moment, mirror the current mood of the nearly empty courtroom. His face betrays neither fear nor confidence, but rather a dampened melancholy. As he is wordlessly seated in the defendantÂ’s chair, his dull eyes look up expectantly at the empty seats.

The trial will begin soon.

Judge: Orneth (a male rock gnome Guvner)
Defendant/Accused: Ceszar, represented by Ostellious.
Witness(es): [inform the Court of any witnesses you wish to call forth during trials before trial starts]
Evidences: [inform the Court of any evidences you wish to call forth during trials before trial starts]
Prosecution: Deri, [Inform the court if new representer comes before trial starts]
Witness(es): [inform the Court of any witnesses you wish to call forth during trials before trial starts]
Evidences: [inform the Court of any evidences you wish to call forth during trials before trial starts]
Jury: None




City Courtroom Information

• No armors within the Courtroom. (everyone will be inspected on entrance, one should wear casual clothing [appearance changed fullplates are fullplates])
• No chivs within the Courtroom. (everyone will be inspected on entrance)
• Accused (Ceszar) is going to be having hands and legs shackled during the court.
• Spells may only be cast by neutral Judge approved spellslingers.
• Only witnesses and evidences registered before the court begins will be taken on count.
• Witnesses during the trial are kept in separate rooms outside the courtroom, they can't hear the others or converse with others during it is going. (so hopefully they were bribed before the trials!)
• This is open trial, cutters and bashers are allowed to come watch.
• Order will be kept by neutral Court decided guards.
• Judge will make the trial go on and stop derailing.
• Objections will not be heard, but look at the above point. (Because in forum story writing everyone writes multiple paragraphs and they can't really be stopped in middle of it, unless breaking time and space continuum)
• Hear-say or unreliable evidences can be used, but will not affect much to decision of Judge.

City Court Proceedings

1. Everyone are taken to their places.
2. Judge comes in, everyone rises (I'll make basic assumption everyone does to save time from waiting everyone to post it)
3. Charges are read, judge will open the trials officially with slam of his hammer.
4. Opening speeches: First goes defendant that can make opening speech to introduce himself- the point of view of this case, after this the prosecution does the same (introduce the victim and then talk of the case), prosecution as right to do this later on also right before they call their witnesses.
5. Prosecutions Witnesses: Now are called Prosecutions witnesses one by one, the Prosecution will question them first, after which defendant questions them. Evidences may be brought in middle of the witness questionings.
6. Defendants Witnesses: First are called Defendants witnesses one by one, the Defendant will question them first after which prosecution questions them. Evidences may be brought in middle of the witness questionings.
7. Judges decision: Based on the trials on going the Judge will make his decision.

((I'll leave you time to collect witnesses/evidence lists you might want to include and will be starting the trial by the end of this week latest. Edit: Oh and I know it appears modern system, but Guvners are really organized to begin with and since they control the Court...))

Ostellius speaks:

First, I have some procedural questions.

Normally, the prosecution goes first. The prosecution calls their witnesses and presents their evidence before the defense. The reason for this is so that the defendant knows what evidence needs to be rebutted. It also helps to clarify the charges against the defendant. As it stands now, the defendant can only speculate about what the charges the prosecution intends to accuse him of. Unless, this is a guilty until proven innocent court? He wasn't actually there, so this whole trial experience is rather kafka-esque for him.

I think their should be some sort of formal arraignment in which the charges are read and the law that the defendant is accused of breaking is formally spelled out. (OOC: if you need help with this, PM me).

Also, we should have provisions to cross-examine the other sides witnesses. The defendant should not have to call a hostile witness in order to present his impeachment evidence. Especially, if the prosecution doesn't intend to actually call a particular witness. The defendant shouldn't have to make a precautionary impeachment.

Also, we should discuss objections and the rules of evidence. Is hearsay admissible? What about testimony in which the witness lacks personal knowledge? What is the procedure for lodging a complaint about a particular piece of testimony or evidence?

Thank you, your honor, for clarifying these rules. *bowing*

*The Guvners hear Ostellius out, spend little to no time really replying to him, only alters the proceedings and rules of court*

(bump)