The factual intermediary is required to answer all questions of fact that determine how the law is to be applied to the evidence presented by both parties. “Questions of fact” are distinguished from “legal questions” because they are the question of what actually happened. “Legal questions” are questions about how the corresponding law is to be applied to the parties. An example of something determined by the investigator of the fact is whether or not Party A threw a stone at Party B before Party B shot Part A. A point of law that the judge would then decide in light of this situation is whether or not Party B can adequately assert self-defence, since Party A threw a stone at Party B before shooting Party A. In a court case, judges are professional judges of fact. At a hearing, the judge makes both findings of fact and legal decisions. [4] The findings of a trial judge are not normally changed by a court of appeal. [5] In a jury trial, a jury from Trier is exposed to the facts.
The jury determines the facts and applies them to the law or relevant law that the judge must use to reach a verdict. Thus, in a jury trial, findings of fact are made by the jury, while the judge makes legal decisions about the evidence heard by the jury and the legal framework governing the case. Juries are instructed to strictly obey the law prescribed by the judge, but are not required to do so. In some cases, this leads to jury annulment, when the jury`s verdict differs from what the law says. In a jury trial in which the jury is the investigator of the facts, all arguments and evidence are presented to the jury so that it can determine how the events related to the trial unfolded. There are different rules depending on the jurisdiction and nature of the case with respect to the size of the jury, the extent to which jury members must agree on how to decide the facts of the case, and the burden of proof that the parties must meet in proving certain facts. In addition, some regions protect the defendant`s right to a jury trial in criminal cases, so it is often necessary for a jury composed of the defendant`s peers to act as a discoverer of the facts, unless the party concerned waives this right. In situations where the right to a jury as a discoverer of facts is suspended or is not required by the laws of the region, the judge generally assumes the role of investigator.
This is called a court case, and there is generally less theatricality on the part of the parties in the process. For example, opening and closing statements – the tools that parties use to appeal to jury emotions – are generally not made during court hearings. Instead, the parties present their arguments to the judge, present evidence and witnesses, and the judge makes the appropriate findings of fact and law. n. in a trial or prosecution, the jury or judge (if there is no jury) who decides whether the facts have been proved. Occasionally, a judge may appoint a “special master” to investigate and report on the existence of certain facts. An investigator in civil or criminal proceedings is the person or group of persons entrusted with the responsibility of determining the answer to all questions of fact – as opposed to legal questions – when deciding the case. Generally, it is a responsibility assigned to a jury in a trial that decides how the facts of the case are to be applied to the law of the case at hand.
However, in a court case, which is a proceeding in which the parties present their arguments directly to the judge without the presence of a jury, the judge acts as a fact-finding in addition to his or her typical duty to make decisions about the law. The investigator differs depending on the type of procedure. In a jury trial, it is the jury; In a trial without a jury, the judge is both the investigator and the judge of the law. In administrative proceedings, the investigator may be a hearing officer or a hearing body. [3] A trier of fact or investigator of fact is a person or group who determines what facts are available in a court proceeding (usually a trial) and how relevant they are to the outcome of the case. [1] To establish a fact is to decide, on the basis of the evidence presented, whether something existed or whether an event occurred. [2] In the United States, an administrative judge (ALJ) presides over both judicial proceedings (and decides laws) and claims or disputes (in other words, ALJ-controlled proceedings are magistrates) involving administrative law, but ALJs are not part of an independent judiciary.