Page 92 - Judge Manual 2017

between them”.

The choice of verbs can lead the witness. The question, “How fast were the
boats travelling when blue ‘smashed’ into yellow?” yields a higher estimate of
speed than the same sentence using the verbs, ‘collided’, ‘bumped’, ‘made
contact’ or ‘hit’. A better question using language from the rule would be “What
was the speed of the boats when contact occurred?”
Questions about the existence of an object or event that use the definite article,
“the” are more likely to yield a “yes” answer than questions that use the
indefinite article, “a”. “Did you hear the hail?” implies that the hail was made,
and the party or witness is likely to condone it, even if it is false. A better
question would be, “Tell us anything that you heard”.

K.18 Deliberations

Once all the evidence is taken, it is the protest committee’s responsibility to find
the facts and make a decision. Often the entire panel has privately reached the
same facts and conclusion. The chairman can save considerable time if he or
she asks the members for their decision. If everyone has come to the same
conclusion, then writing the facts and conclusions goes very quickly. Finding
that the protest committee does not see the situation the same way allows the
committee to quickly refocus on the differences. This decision-making process
must be conducted in private.
Another method of proceeding is for the chairman or preferably his appointee,
commonly known as the scribe, to write during the hearing the points he
considers are the facts of what has happened and if clear, also the conclusions
and applicable rules. This can speed up the decision-making process. The
scribe is normally an experienced International Judge. Should a member not
agree on some point, or believe there is an omission of an essential fact, there
is a discussion on that point to reach an agreement. Apply the relevant rules to
these facts and identify any missing ones, if not included in the scribe’s original
draft. Before reaching a final agreement, read out the facts found and decision,
giving the protest committee members one last chance to propose a change.
When the case is complex with a wide range of opinions among the protest
committee members, it is preferable for the chairman to start by asking each
protest committee member for an overview, and then address the points of
difference.

K.19 Hearing Procedure: Finding the Facts

In almost all cases the differences of opinion are settled by the quality of the
evidence. The racing rules do not give the onus of proof to one boat or the
other. Port is not required to prove she kept clear of starboard. A protest
committee is required to consider all the evidence, consider who was in the best
position to determine what happened, determine which evidence is more
credible, then decide the facts of the incident.
It is an unalterable responsibility of the protest committee to establish the “facts”
that the decision will be based upon, even when the parties present widely
differing testimony. If one party says the boats were one meter apart while the
other says three meters apart, the protest committee must decide which opinion
is more credible. Varying testimony is common and does not necessarily mean