On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 erik at debill.org wrote: >On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 01:15:19PM -0700, David Silberstein wrote: >> >> But remember, they have access to an (alleged) lie detector. All >> the Teckla has to do to verify his alibi is state it under the Orb. > >I doubt that they can use the orb all that often. [Teckla petty >thefts; Dragon duels] [...] There are just too many people and >crimes to take up Orb time with them all. >Besides, having a "lie detector" is more likely to make you lazy. Well, you can't have it both ways. If the Orb is only used in a few cases, then they don't have it to make them lazy, and they have to have trials using their own knowledge and skills at analysis. >Hell, existing (modern, real world) lie detectors are more about >intimidation than actual science. I understood that our lie detectors are sufficiently error-prone that they are not admissible as evidence? >> Also, while most nobles might not care, there's a whole House for >> whom justice and the miscarriage thereof is of paramount extreme >> interest: The Iorich. > >This may be so. However, remember that this is also a culture where >it is accepted practice for nobles who disagree to hire armies of >mercenaries and fight wars, and it isn't considered unjust to have >normal folks fighting Sethra Lavode over a paternity suit. What? Oh, Norathar e'Lanya. And that whole thing of Dragons being *allowed* to throw armies at each other is something I don't quite get. Is there an example in our history where vassals of a strong ruler who had a recognized legal system were allowed to settle grievances by fighting minor wars? Obviously, vassals of a weak or figurehead ruler don't count. > Once you accept trial by combat as a way to settle disputes >things get very very different, at least in my mind. > But only on the field of combat. Presumably in courts of law, legal argument still holds sway. >> >you'll probably be a fish out of water in court with an educated >> >suspect and a bunch of high nobles breathing down your neck. >> >> Yes, and if one noble accuses another? Do you think Vlad is the >> first noble to stand trial? Do you really think that sloppy style >> of interrogations would wash when the accusing party could hear how >> easy his opponent was getting off? > >None of the books have ever implied anything like our modern system of >direct examination, cross examination, re-direct and re-cross. Even >most countries in the world don't allow for that. Being able to >depend on a fair trial is really pretty darn rare, Well, that's a good point, especially in light of Khaavren's interrogation, which I just re-read. But I think Zerika *wants* to do things as fairly as possible. I can see her working with the Iorich to have fair trials. >If their justice system was fair, Vlad wouldn't be forced to accept a >beating at the hands of the Phoenix guard. He would be able to defend >himself and then get acquitted on the grounds that he was defending >himself. Hm. Perhaps. But you have to remember: Vlad is a *criminal*. He breaks the law in minor ways all the time, and in capital ways less frequently. Had he actually demanded "justice", I strongly suspect that the outcome would have been very ironic, and made for a much briefer series. And for that matter, in our world, how many cases are there where someone is allowed to defend themselves against being beaten by the police? >Given the distaste that so many have for Jhereg, would it be >surprising if their best legal minds didn't want to touch a Jhereg >case? Just two Jhereg scum offing each other. Nothing >interesting for the scholars and no glory for the rest of the >folks. Even if the very best of them could tie Vlad into knots, >this is just the sort of case that would get delegated to the >least competent underlings. As I noted, it is almost certain that Vlad's interrogators were not Iorich of any sort, but were rather nobles of House Jhereg.