Name: Hearsay Heresy
Description: In a recent high profile trial in @@CAPITAL@@, notorious mobster Max "the Berry Man" Capone was accused of murder, racketeering, grand theft, and jaywalking. The trial ended in acquittal on all counts after several witnesses who had given detailed and damning out-of-court statements to police failed to come to court. The prosecutor's office has now come to you demanding that @@NAME@@ change it's laws regarding the use of out-of-court statements.
Validity: All nations with criminal trials.
Options:
[option]"What a miscarriage of justice," shouts disgruntled prosecutor @@RANDOMNAME@@, as he flings a huge stack of police reports on your desk, "Look at all of these great statements made by a dozen witnesses, but now that jerk Max goes free just because they didn't personally show up to court. Do you know how hard it is to wrangle up a dozen witnesses for trial? Like herding cats! If the police had been able to testify to what these witnesses told them, that trial would have ended in a guilty verdict after 5 minutes! It's as simple as this: if a witness makes a report to a cop, that cop should be able to testify to what was said. I guarantee we'd have more scumbag criminals in the pokey, and we'd spend less money doing it."
[effect]old folks reminisce about the last time someone was acquitted of a crime
[stats]law and order+, government funding-, civil rights--
[option]"You can't be serious!" cries famous defense lawyer @@RANDOMNAME@@, who defended Max Capone, "don't you realize we have this rule against out-of-court statements for a reason? A person can only have a fair trial if they get to confront their accuser face to face in open court. Sometimes the reason witnesses don't show up to trial is that they know they were lying to police all along! Allowing in all of these out-of-court statements will mean more innocent people get convicted. Sure, requiring witnesses to show up for trial may mean that sometimes a guilty person will go free; ahem, not my client of course, but some actually guilty person. But isn't it better if a thousand guilty people go free than to wrongfully convict even a single person?!"
[effect]obviously guilty people are acquitted when key witnesses don't show up for trial
[stats]law and order-, civil rights++, safety-
[option]"All of this is too complicated," interrupts @@RANDOMNAME@@, a recently appointed minister from a very rural district, "this right here is why people are so darn sick of all these courts and legal shenanigans. Seems like any way you slice it the only options are to spend a bunch of money on a stupid system and watch as criminals go free. Well not if I have anything to say about it! I propose a third way: lets bring back trial by ordeal! Let the criminally accused wrestle with a @@ANIMAL@@ and if they win they didn't do it and get to go free. If they lose, we lock up whatever remains. It's a fool proof system that our ancestors used for a thousand years, and I'll tell ya, they didn't waste a pretty penny on it!"
[effect]the strong are acquitted and the weak are trampled in trial by @@ANIMAL@@
[stats]animal related death+, extremism++, law and order--, civil rights--, government spending--, tax--
Looking for help! This is my first attempt to draft an issue so be kind if I made obvious mistakes.
