As an example, one of the easiest things to determine is whether
something happened 14+ days ago. However Justified, Inculpable, or
Unaware have (historically) been more subject to CFJs. This would
force someone to send a case to CFJ to determine if it fit one of
those more complicated categories before just outright saying "hey
this is 14+ days old, who cares if it was Justified?"
On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 6:10 PM Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> > > I'm not sure about this proliferation of verdicts. In a previous system,
> > > many of your categories are actually done in the Sentencing phase.
> > > E.g. "Guilty/not guilty" was a finding of fact and the law, but there
> > > was a [GREEN CARD EQUIVALENT] in the sentencing phase because the action
> > > was Justified, or Untimely, or Unaware, etc.
> >
> > That's intresting. I'd like to keep the sentencing phase to the actual
> > determination of the penalty and settle other issuenin the verdict phase. I
> > think the cascading format solves any problems that putting those in the
> > verdict phase might otherwise cause. Do you see any I’ve missed?
>
> I don't see any you've missed, but now having looked through the comments
> I really agree with D. Margaux here. If something fits multiple categories,
> all of which end with "no punishment", I think it's error-prone and finicky
> to insist that only the first one in the list is appropriate.
>
>
