Two friends and I used to play in some forum RP called "Courtroom Battle." It was inspired from the Phoenix Wright series, a text-based games where the player plays as an attorney seeking to prove his client not guilty.
The framework was simple, the attorney and the prosecutor. Testimony was made, cross-examinations given and everything went on from.
However, there were some issues. One was that there really was no side that was right or wrong, so it never really could end. Secondly, there was too many ways to play a hand of God. Someone could call in a police detective to show "incriminating" evidence straight out of CSI: Miami; out of court events could happen. Then there was insanely stupid minute things that stalled everything that couldn't be proven or disproven. ("You can't say he's guilty because the prison bars block this part of the screen here that would mean that the defendant didn't kill the victim!" "I'd like to call in a scientific investigator...")
We'll be operating on a few Phoenix Wright things, so let's get them straight.
- Testimony is the crux of the matter.
Testimony is prepared by the Prosecution, given, and then cross-examined by the Defense. Cross-Examination is when the Defense analyzes testimony for contradictions with evidence, plain lies, etc. - All evidence presented must have relevancy to the case at hand.
Although this scrap of cloth has the suspect's fingerprints on it, since it's a scrap of cloth, and it cannot be tied to the case at hand, it is irrelevant. However, if a picture relevant to the case was shown where there is a place where this scrap of cloth should be, it becomes relevant. - The Defense operates on a "Five strikes" basis.
If the Defense continues to do things such as propose evidence that does not directly involve their objection, a strike will be given. Example: The Defense objects to a witness using seeing a specific knife being used, but rather showing evidence disproving this, the Defense presents a clock from the court record, proving nothing.
All evidence presented in cross-examination must definitely prove what the Defense is saying. For example, they can show a piece of evidence not in the court record that proves a point, and since they proved a connection to the case, the evidence is added to the court record.
The Prosecution may object to the Defense's objections, and the Defense may also as well. This line of objections ends when either side has definitively disproven or proven the point raised. - There's something wrong with every testimony.
Either side can rest their case, forfeiting the ability to press further. This is an irreversible decision, and afterwords the Jury will then determine if the suspect is guilty or not.
Cross-ExaminationHere, the Defense can examine the testimony and search for any discrepancies within the Court Record. They can press for further information, something that cannot be refused. Amendments can be made to the testimony if the Court sees fit. This can come from evidence presented or a information extracted via other means.
Positions:
- Judge: Me
Oversees the court, accepts and admits evidence.
- Defense:
Defends their client, the defendant. Their goal is a "Not Guilty" verdict.
- Prosecution:
Seeks a "Guilty" verdict. Presents and prepares testimony.
- Jury
Essentially doesn't do anything but stick around to the end to give a verdict based one what they have seen. They receive no other information other than what is submitted in court. One player plays the entire journey. If a decision can not be made, they can request for further testimony. (Any side that has rested will resume court as usual until they rest again.)
Once everything has begun, after two days (real time) of inactivity the Judge will come to a verdict on his own.Any verdict is indisputable.The case will be created by me, and testimony will be created by the Prosecution based on a topic I've given.
Questions and sign ups go here.
FAQ
Search
Register
Login
