justice. 1. The fair and proper administration of laws. Taken from Black's Law Dictionary, Bryan A Gardner, Editor

Now is the time for the scales of Justice to be raised once more over our Realm. To establish Order and a sense of security for all whom live within the territories of Britannia. A High Court shall be established to hear the cries for Justice, to punish those opposed to Law and to clear the names of the innocent. From the Charter of the High Court, Statement of Purpose.

At the trial on Monday August 7th , Crown vs PUU the scales of justice were upended while as the administration of laws were absent or intentionally skewed under the supervision of High Justicar William Wingate. Trials are meant to be an exchange of facts and opinions between two opposing sides, the Adversary or Prosecutor and the Advocate or Defense. In normal court proceedings the Prosecutor presents his arguments and reasons why the defendant is guilty of the charges listed. In this trial the prosecutor was only allowed to speak after the Advocate, Lady Joylah had completely presented and practically closed her case. A judge who is knowledgeable of Court Protocol would never allow this disorder to occur.

From Court Protocol The Trial:

“6.Opening statements and arguments.
The Head Adversary shall at least present the list of crimes that the defendant is accused of. The Adversary shall also be allowed to briefly present any key details of the case that he or she is legally
allowed to present.
b.The Advocate will enter the plea of the Defendant and a brief statement refuting the claims.”

This section clearly grants the Adversary the opportunity to briefly present key details of the case before the Advocate enters her plea and submits a brief statement refuting the Adversary's claims.
In the trial the Adversary, Lord Strider never had the opportunity to present key details of his case, therefore there should have been no response to his claims by Lady Joylah “dimples”, the Advocate.

Lady Joylah's response was by no means brief, taking over an hour. High Justicar Wingate encouraged her to continue presenting motions that rightly belong in the presenting of evidence during a trial until the case of Crown vs PUU was for all practical matters closed.

This is not justice. It is either negligence or lack of knowledge on the part of High Justicar William Wingate, or it is the most foul collusion of two parties to utilize the judicial process to suit their desires. In either reason justice is miscarried. Unfortunately we cannot cry out for mistrial, for a defendant tried once and freed, cannot be tried again for the same crime. However we can argue rightly with the High Council that the current High Justicar and one Advocate for the defense are at very least uninformed of the law, and should not serve the court any longer.

I encourage all citizens to attend the next session of the High Council Meeting to make your complaints known to those who are supposed to represent your best interests. Find out who your representative is and inform them continuously of your opinions. Without your efforts our courts will descend into nothing more than travesty. Make yourselves heard.