What's new

Criminal Justice: in Real Life and in RCRP

Limitless

Retired Admin
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
4,415
Introduction

Everyone has been saying there is too much reading in order to understand the law and sadly there is no way around it. To understand the law, you need to read it, regardless of how simplified it is. Anyway, I will try to break it down here and hopefully it's not too much reading. What's written here is split in two - how the criminal justice system works, in general, in the United States, and how we adapt this for RCRP in order to strike a balance between realism and simplicity. However, it is not advised you use this guide for your IRL law homework - I am not a lawyer and I have no real life legal training.


The law and court system in San Andreas is loosely based off California, and as such - the United States. Hence it operates the Common Law system.
The Common Law system's most important trait is that if there is disagreement on what the law means or in what way it applies, it is precedent that defines the outcome. A precedent is a principle established in a previous legal case that can be called upon if a current case shares sufficiently similar details or facts.

Most important terminology source
  • Trier of fact - the person(s) responsible about determining what really happened in a case, depending on available evidence. Those are usually the jurors in a jury, but often the judge as well.
  • Jury trial - the jurors are the triers of fact which is standard for criminal cases (but on RCRP it is difficult to set up) and bench trials are the usual for civil cases; though jury trials can be seen for civil cases and bench trials for criminal cases.
  • Acquittal - a jury verdict that a criminal defendant is not guilty, or the finding of a judge that the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction.
  • Admissible - a term used to describe evidence that may be considered by a jury or judge in civil and criminal cases.
  • Affirmed - in the practice of the court of appeals, it means that the court of appeals has concluded that the lower court decision is correct and will stand as rendered by the lower court.
  • Affidavit - a written or printed statement made under oath.
  • Answer - the formal written statement by a defendant in a civil case that responds to a complaint, articulating the grounds for defense.
  • Appeal - a request made after a trial by a party that has lost on one or more issues that a higher court review the decision to determine if it was correct.
  • Arraignment - a proceeding in which a criminal defendant is brought into court, told of the charges in an indictment or information, and asked to plead guilty or not guilty.
  • Assets - property of all kinds, including real and personal, tangible and intangible.
  • Bail - the release, prior to trial, of a person accused of a crime, under specified conditions designed to assure that person's appearance in court when required.
  • Bench trial - the judge is the trier of fact and it is him or her who must decide which party's case is stronger.
  • Burden of proof - the duty to prove disputed facts. In civil cases, a plaintiff generally has the burden of proving his or her case. In criminal cases, the government has the burden of proving the defendant's guilt.
  • Capital offense - a crime punishable by death.
  • Case law - the law as established in previous court decisions. A synonym for legal precedent. Akin to common law, which springs from tradition and judicial decisions.
  • Conviction - a judgment of guilt against a criminal defendant.
  • Counsel - legal advice; a term also used to refer to the lawyers in a case.
  • Count - an allegation in an indictment or information, charging a defendant with a crime. An indictment or information may contain allegations that the defendant committed more than one crime. Each allegation is referred to as a count.
  • Damages - money that a defendant pays a plaintiff in a civil case if the plaintiff has won. Damages may be compensatory (for loss or injury) or punitive (to punish and deter future misconduct).
  • De facto - Latin, meaning "in fact" or "actually." Something that exists in fact but not as a matter of law.
  • De jure - Latin, meaning "in law." Something that exists by operation of law.
  • De novo - Latin, meaning "anew." A trial de novo is a completely new trial. Appellate review de novo implies no deference to the trial judge's ruling.
  • Declaratory judgment - a judge's statement about someone's rights. For example, a plaintiff may seek a declaratory judgment that a particular statute, as written, violates some constitutional right.
  • Default judgment - a judgment awarding a plaintiff the relief sought in the complaint because the defendant has failed to appear in court or otherwise respond to the complaint.
  • Defendant - in a civil case, the person or organization against whom the plaintiff brings suit; in a criminal case, the person accused of the crime.
  • Deposition - an oral statement made before an officer authorized by law to administer oaths. Such statements are often taken to examine potential witnesses, to obtain discovery, or to be used later in trial.
  • Discovery - procedures used to obtain disclosure of evidence before trial.
  • Dismissal with prejudice - court action that prevents an identical lawsuit from being filed later. Without prejudice is the opposite.
  • Due process - in criminal law, the constitutional guarantee that a defendant will receive a fair and impartial trial. In civil law, the legal rights of someone who confronts an adverse action threatening liberty or property.
  • Exclusionary rule - doctrine that says evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant's constitutional or statutory rights is not admissible at trial.
  • Exculpatory evidence - evidence indicating that a defendant did not commit the crime.
  • Hearsay - evidence presented by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else. With some exceptions, hearsay generally is not admissible as evidence at trial.
  • Inculpatory evidence - evidence indicating that a defendant did commit the crime.
  • Indictment - the formal charge stating that there is enough evidence that the defendant committed the crime to justify having a trial.
  • Injunction - a court order preventing one or more named parties from taking some action.
  • Judgment - the official decision of a court finally resolving the dispute between the parties to the lawsuit.
  • Jurisdiction - the legal authority of a court to hear and decide a certain type of case.
  • Jury - the group of persons selected to hear the evidence in a trial and render a verdict on matters of fact.
  • Litigation - a case, controversy, or lawsuit. Participants (plaintiffs and defendants) in lawsuits are called litigants.
  • Mistrial - an invalid trial, caused by fundamental error. When a mistrial is declared, the trial must start again
  • Moot - not subject to a court ruling because the controversy has not actually arisen, or has ended.
  • Motion - a request by a litigant to a judge for a decision on an issue relating to the case.
  • Nolo contendere - no contest. A plea of nolo contendere has the same effect as a plea of guilty, as far as the criminal sentence is concerned, but may not be considered as an admission of guilt for any other purpose.
  • Opinion - a judge's written explanation of the decision of the court.
  • Plea - in a criminal case, the defendant's statement pleading "guilty" or "not guilty" in answer to the charges. See also nolo contendere.
  • Pleadings - written statements filed with the court that describe a party's legal or factual assertions about the case.
  • Precedent - a court decision in an earlier case with facts and legal issues similar to a dispute currently before a court.
  • Pretrial conference - a meeting of the judge and lawyers to plan the trial, to discuss which matters should be presented to the jury, to review proposed evidence and witnesses, and to set a trial schedule. Typically, the judge and the parties also discuss the possibility of settlement of the case.
  • Pro se - representing oneself. Serving as one's own lawyer.
  • Procedure - the rules for conducting a lawsuit; there are rules of civil procedure, criminal procedure, evidence, bankruptcy, and appellate procedure.
  • Reverse - the act of a court setting aside the decision of a lower court.
  • Settlement - parties to a lawsuit resolve their dispute without having a trial. Settlements often involve the payment of compensation by one party in at least partial satisfaction of the other party's claims, but usually do not include the admission of fault.
  • Standard of proof - degree of proof required. In criminal cases, prosecutors must prove a defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." The majority of civil lawsuits require proof "by a preponderance of the evidence" (50 percent plus), but in some the standard is higher and requires "clear and convincing" proof.
  • Statute - a law passed by a legislature.
  • Subpoena - a command, issued under a court's authority, to a witness to appear and give testimony.
  • Testimony - evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.
  • Tort - a civil, not criminal, wrong. A negligent or intentional injury against a person or property, with the exception of breach of contract.
  • Verdict - the decision of a trial jury or a judge that determines the guilt or innocence of a criminal defendant, or that determines the final outcome of a civil case.
  • Warrant - court authorization, most often for law enforcement officers, to conduct a search or make an arrest.
  • Writ - a written court order directing a person to take, or refrain from taking, a certain act.
  • Writ of certiorari - an order issued by the Supreme Court directing the lower court to transmit records for a case which it will hear on appeal.



Criminal Trials in Real Life

Also called criminal complaints, this is where you'd end up if you break the law. If there is a chance you can get a jail term, the criminal complaint will always be submitted by the prosecutor - as opposed by criminal or civil infractions (such as traffic tickets) which are "prosecuted" by the issuing officer.

The key participants in a criminal trial are:

  • DEFENDANT - the one party to the case.
    The person accused of a crime, innocent until proven guilty. In criminal trials, the Defendant is usually a living person, but depending on the law broken, an entity, such as a corporation, can also be a Defendant.

  • PROSECUTOR - the other party to the case.
    • OVERVIEW
      The lawyer for the state/government (the Plaintiff). Depending on the jurisdiction, the chief prosecutor in the area may be called 'District Attorney', 'State Attorney', 'City Attorney', 'County Prosecutor', and so on. They may have various tasks, but in the core of each is that they have the responsibility to bring forth criminal complaints and prove in a court of law that the suspects are guilty of the crimes they are charged with. Usually the chief prosecutor has a number of deputies and subordinates, who are also prosecutors and who deal with most trials. On top of being their boss, the chief prosecutor only deals with the most complex and important trials due to him/her usually being the most experienced and competent.
    • FUNCTIONALITY
      A prosecutor has as much of an investigatory role as a legal role. The prosecutors often join detectives on investigations and sometimes perform their own investigations into potentially criminal behaviour (usually more complicated crimes such as white collar, fraud, public corruption, etc). In real life, the will, strength, investigatory ability and law knowledge are very important to the administration of justice. For example, Harvey Dent from The Dark Knight managed to wreak havoc in the underworld of Gotham because he was skilled, determined, motivated, and most importantly - incorruptible. In some jurisdictions, the chief prosecutor of a local authority is a public position for which elections are held.
    • RELATIONSHIP WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT
      There is a common misconception that prosecutors and the police are on the same team. This is not always true. It appears that they are, because it is mainly the police who bring suspects to court for charging and prosecution. However, should the police or a police officer be committing a crime, the prosecutor is obliged to charge them as any other civilian.
      When someone is to be put to trial, a prosecutor goes and asks for the casefile of the investigation, or for all the evidence the law enforcement officer can come up with. The prosecutor reviews the collected evidence and determines whether there is probable cause to prosecute, and if there is - whether there is sufficient probability that the suspect will be found guilty. No one wants to waste their time with something that they know is going to fail, plus there are legal protections that say a prosecutor must not charge frivolously, that is must not charge without sufficient grounds and without a lawful backing. The police have an incentive to assist the prosecutor, because if the prosecution fails for lack of evidence, there may be blowback on the officer.
      Depending on jurisdiction, chief prosecutors have a considerable authority and command the respect of law enforcement, so much so that if an officer fucks up, he may lose his badge on recommendation from the prosecutor's office.

  • DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL - counsel means "defence" in general, and it may consist of one or more lawyers for the defendant, who are tasked to: firstly, rebut the arguments of the prosecutor, and secondly, prove the defendant is innocent if they can. Proving the defendant innocent can be as important as holding off the prosecutor's attempts to prove that they are guilty. Very often these attorneys are public defenders provided by the state to people who cannot afford a lawyer.
    Experienced lawyers can become a sort-of private investigators as they try to find more evidence to make a hole in the prosecution's case, or they may hire private investigators to help them out. A lawyer's salary depends on his experience, skillset, and reputation, and for complex cases a more experienced lawyer can make a difference.

  • JUDGE - presides the case and, in the Common Law, acts as an arbiter between the prosecution and defence, in other words the judge is the trier of law. In bench trials, the judge can also be a trier of fact. Judges rise up from being lawyers or prosecutors and often have a minimum threshold for age and experience before they can even apply.

  • JURY - the trier of fact in most criminal trials.
    • STRUCTURE
      A jury consists of random citizens called 'jurors' who must not have any conflict of interest with the person or matter they will be jury on. Their votes all have the same weight, but one of the jurors is selected to be "speaker" and to announce the jury verdict to the court. The jury is kept locked away in private to avoid outside interference while they are discussing what verdict to give, which is called 'jury deliberations'.
    • IMPANELMENT
      An imaneplment means the process in which the jurors are selected. This is a complex process with many technicalities. Each party selects jurors from a pool of civilians selected for jury duty by the court, and offers these selections to the opposing party. The selection is made with the goal to find jurors who are most likely to side with the party making the selection - based on ethnicity, occupation, publicly available information such as social media, and more. Then, the opposing party may either accept the proposed jurors, or try to 'impeach' any or all of them based on various reasons, usually leading down to showing that this juror is going to be biased from the start. The decision whether to impeach a juror or not sits with the judge, who weighs the arguments from both sides.
      The process of offering and rejecting jurors is repeated until no one can bring any more arguments against any of the jurors. Some cynics claim that "nowadays trials are won and lost during jury selection".
    • VERDICT
      Depending on the state, juries may or may not be required to return an unanimous verdict. In federal court, jurors must return an unanimous verdict. Unanimous means that all jurors agree that someone is guilty or not guilty. To find out how they vote, they use anonymous voting. What the jury talks about during the deliberations is confidential and no one is allowed to know, with small exceptions.

  • WITNESSES - both sides can call witnesses to help prove their points, and they can often be cross-examined by the other party to find gaps in their testimony.
    • EYE-WTINESS
      People who have seen the crime take place, or have seen, heard, smelled, or touched anything that is important to the case. There is a wide range of reasons why an eyewitness may be called.
    • EXPERT WITNESS
      These people are called upon by Defence and Prosecution alike to interpret evidence or offer professional advice based on their knowledge and qualifications in science, or vast experience with a certain phenomenon. Most commonly, experts called upon in criminal trials are medical doctors, forensics technicians, reconstruction experts, behavioral scientists and psychologists. Expert witnesses are generally not allowed to offer opinions as to what happened, which remains in the domain of eyewitnesses.


There are several key stages in a criminal trial:

  1. PRE-TRIAL
    1. PLEA
      The defendant enters a 'plea' - usually guilty or not guilty. The prosecution may seek to achieve a 'plea bargain' where the defendant would plead guilty in exchange of, for example, the prosecution dropping a charge, or not seeking the death penalty, or giving information on his/her associates.
    2. INDICTMENT
      It allows for the judge to look over the evidence and see if there is a merit for the case to continue. This is not done on RCRP when the charges are contested retroactively, and may be done by the prosecutor in other cases.
    3. DISCOVERY
      Both parties exchange ALL evidence available to them including who the witnesses are and what they are going to testify. You are not allowed to catch the other party off guard during the trial by dropping a piece of evidence out of nowhere.
    4. MOTIONS
      Parties are allowed to submit certain motions to the court only before the trial has started. The most common one is the motion to suppress evidence where a party would ask the judge to declare a piece of evidence or witness unacceptable to be presented to the jury (i.e. to strike an evidence). There are a lot of reasonings to strike an evidence, some of which are related to constitutionality or procedure rules.
  2. TRIAL
    1. OPENING STATEMENTS
      • The prosecutor, speaking first, presents the facts of the case, from the state's perspective, and walks the jury/judge through what the state will try to prove - what the defendant did, how, and why.
      • The defense gives the jury its own interpretation of the facts, and sets the stage for rebutting key evidence and presenting any legal defenses.
    2. PROSECUTION CASE-IN-CHIEF
      The prosecutor methodically sets forth evidence in an attempt to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime. It is at this point that the prosecutor calls eyewitnesses and experts to testify who may be cross-examined by the defence. The prosecutor may also introduce physical evidence, such as photographs, documents, and medical reports.
    3. DEFENCE CASE-IN-CHIEF
      The defense can present its own evidence in the same proactive manner. However, in some cases the defense may choose not to present a "case-in-chief," instead deciding to make its key points through cross-examination of the prosecution's witnesses, and challenges to its evidence.
    4. CLOSING ARGUMENTS
      Like the opening statement, this seeks to drive home the point of each party and convince the jury the defendant is guilty/not guilty. This is the last time both parties may speak to the jury before the verdict.
    5. JURY DELIBERATIONS
      The judge usually gives some legal clarifications to the jury before they retire to consider the facts of the case. In San Andreas on RCRP, we operate an "unanimous jury" principle - all jurors must return the same verdict for the deliberation to end. This is not the case in every state IRL.
    6. VERDICT AND SENTENCING
      Unless the death penalty is on the table, the judge will decide the sentence length based on aggravating and mitigating circumstances as well as previous convictions and existing statute. In real life, the judge may even hear more testimony just to decide the right mode and length of sentence.
  3. POST-TRIAL
    The defendant has the right to appeal a guilty verdict before the Court of Appeals, and both parties have the right to submit post-trial motions that may influence the actual outcome.
    It is important to mention that the right to appeal doesn't mean that there will be another trial - the case is NOT reviewed again in the same manner and a jury decision cannot be overturned (however a judge's decision may be). An appeal asks a higher court to rule on whether court or legal procedures have been mishandled throughout the trial, or if some important legal rule or precedent had been missed. For example, many notorious U.S. Supreme Court cases end up there because the lower courts cannot agree whether something was Constitutional or not.
Criminal Trials in RCRP
There are a few things to consider before delving into how the criminal justice system operates on RCRP, and how it differs from real life.

Firstly, SAN ANDREAS IS NOT CALIFORNIA. With that out of the way:
  1. The amount of crimes committed and arrests made In Game are substantial, and I dare say happen at a considerably higher rate than in real life, population adjusted.
  2. The average player lacks a proper understanding of the criminal justice system in real life.
  3. The average player does not like lengthy stays in IC prison, as it can be seen as "forced" and "OOC punishment". Moreover, the average player does not like spending too much time on roleplay that is disadvantageous.
  4. The average player does not like roleplay that has to be done outside of In Game, such as on the forum.
  5. The average player is not interested in law roleplay due to its complexity. It is difficult to learn and requires more reading than any other type of roleplay, except science roleplay.
  6. A trial that is to be roleplayed In Game requires the coordination of multiple players from different timezones and different activity, where they would have to be online at the same time.
  7. A roleplayed trial In Game can take anywhere between 30 minutes and 3 hours, or more, including technical issues.

That said. In RCRP, the police is allowed to arrest and imprison a suspect without a judge or a jury. This is common throughout the SAMP roleplay community, and here it is also codified ICly through the Penal Code. Officers may arrest, sentence and put in prison anyone who they've seen to commit a crime in line with what it says in the Penal Code. In real life, a person would first have to be brought before a judge, arraigned, plea taken, trial date set, a trial held and a verdict declared before you could even think about sentencing. As mentioned, this would take too long and is also going to make for a rather unexciting roleplay.


Surely there must be some way to prove you're innocent? Yes! There are two ways.

The first and more obvious one. Trial Request (TR). This had previously been called "an appeal", but it was decided that the word appeal is not an accurate description of how we wish to conduct the process of 'appealing' a criminal charge.
Since suspects are not offered a trial by default, a Trial Request is basically a request for a trial to be held. The trial that follows is more or less the same as described above in "key stages of a criminal trial". A prosecutor will be allowed to modify your charges, drop any or all of them, and add more if they deem it fit. You will be allowed to see all evidence, and submit your own evidence. Then, a trial as seen in the movies could be held In Game, if all parties can arrange a suitable time and date. But most commonly, they are done over the forums where everyone can reply at their own convenience. The trial could be either with a jury or with a judge. If found innocent (and a few other situations), you may never be charged again with the same crime or serve more punishment for it.
The idea of the trial request is that it will treat you as a suspect who has not been sentenced or sent to prison yet, in order to offer the most realistic experience of a trial, but this also means they can take a long time to complete.

The second option is called Habeas Corpus (HC). For those unfamiliar with the term, it is a real life tool for prisoners to seek an order from the court to be released, if their detention is unlawful.
Here, we use it in a similar way, and the purpose and outcome are very similar to the ones expected from the Trial Request - to review your charges and determine whether they are good enough or not. However, HC is simplified so that anyone could submit one, and even win one, without the need of an attorney.
After your form is submitted, the judge will collect all evidence that the police have against you and post it for you to examine. Then, you may hold a forum or In Game hearing to try and argue that the evidence is insufficient and bring your own evidence or a witness; the judge may decide that the evidence is insufficient on his own and without you asking him so. The judge will then make a decision, however this decision will not protect you from being charged again for the same crime if the police can bring more evidence against you, and it will be based on a lower stadnard of evidence than in a jury trial. The key differences with the Trial Request are illustrated in the image within the spoiler below.

habeas-jpg.109685



The functionality of each participant in a trial does not differ largely from the description provided in the section about real life criminal justice. However, on RCRP we do not operate with a randomized jury as the average player is unsuitable, or unwilling, to participate seriously. Instead, whenever required, the jurors shall consist of members Faction Management and Administration (this also means it is unlikely to have a sitting jury IG).

Court Etiquette source
  • Wear clothing that would be appropriate for business.
  • Arrive on time.
  • Turn off electronic devices and cell phones before entering the courtroom.
  • Be polite to everyone, especially the judge, opposing counsel, and court staff.
  • Rise when the judge and jury enter and leave the courtroom. Sit once they sit.
  • Stand when speaking to the judge, making or meeting an objection, or questioning a witness.
  • Do not interrupt others while they are talking.
  • Refer to the judge as “Your Honor” when addressing him or her.
  • Direct all concerns and remarks to the bench (the judge) and not opposing counsel.
  • Always answer truthfully, or you may jeopardize your case and potentially land yourself a criminal charge.
  • Use a polite tone and a collected voice. Use formal language.
  • Don’t engage in distracting behavior; don’t sigh, roll your eyes or shake your head if you don’t like a witness’s testimony.
  • Do not shout or speak loudly if you are not supposed to be speaking. ((/low only when talking in the audience etc))

I highly recommend Abdulaziz's guide General Law Knowledge for anyone who wants to learn further about how the law works.
 
Last edited:

Limitless

Retired Admin
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
4,415
Updated: formatting, most important terms, court hierarchy, court etiquette
 

Limitless

Retired Admin
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
4,415
I've given this a major update.

If I've missed anything please let me know. My brain is literally fried right now.
 
Top