Club Judges Seminar Participant Notebook The United States Sailing Association (US Sailing) has copyrighted this Participant Notebookand associated materials. Produced by the Judges Committee, Race Administration Division of US Sailing. US Sailing prohibits any use, reproduction, or transmittal without their written permission. All Rights Reserved. Revision: 14 February 2017 Acknowledgements:US Sailing and the Judges Committee appreciates the hard work and efforts of Gail Bernstein,Patricia Stadel, Rick Mallinson, Karen Butler, Chis Petracco, Means Davis, Bruce Martinson and Joe Krolak in preparing these materials. Thank you!Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Cover Page 1
1 – Introductions My InstructorsSome Useful Contacts Race Administration Director• Matt Hill • 1-800-USSAIL 1 (1-800-877-2451) • Contact or Send Appeals to: • [email protected] • PO Box 1260, 15 Maritime Drive, Portsmouth, RI 02871 US Sailing Judges Committee Chair• Steve Wrigley • [email protected] US Sailing Ombudsman• Bob Lane • [email protected] by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 1-1 1
Some Useful ContactsNancy Glover RAJ, Area ABill Simon RAJ, Area BRic Crabbe RAJ, Area CSarah Ashton RAJ, Area DRick Sullivan RAJ, Area ERichard Mallinson RAJ, Area FJohn Siegel RAJ, Area GThomas Pochereva RAJ, Area HLatham Bell RAJ, Area JMike Kaspar RAJ, Area KWayne Balsiger RAJ, Area LKerry Sullivan SecretaryGlen Oliver Chair, Umpire CommitteeJoe Krolak Chair, Judges ETTSObtain contact information for Judges Committee at:ussailing.org/race-officials/judges/judges-committee-regional- administrative-judges/Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 1-2 2
Some Useful LinksTopic LinkUS SAILING ussailing.orgJudges ussailing.org/race-officials/judges/SOARS soars.ussailing.orgWorld Sailing (WS) sailing.orgWS Racing Rules sailing.org/documents/racingrules/index.phpUS Prescriptions ussailing.org/race-officials/rules/US Judges Manual* ussailing.org/race-officials/race-official-publicationsUS Appeals* ussailing.org/race-officials/race-official-publicationsWS Cases sailing.org/documents/caseandcall/case-book.phpWS Q&A’s sailing.org/raceofficials/qandaservice/index.php*US Sailing members only, requires login Other Useful Documents & Linksussailing.org/race-officials/judges/judge-guidelines/ussailing.org/wp-content/uploads/DARoot/Race Admin/SOARS 2.0/Using Your SOARS Log.pdfPresented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 1-3 3
2 – Protest PreliminariesSession 2 - Protest Preliminaries A protest or request for redress must be in writing, but unless specified in the sailing instructions, it does not have to be on an official protest form. Any scrap of paper will do. So now that a protest has been filed, what next?Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 14 Protest Preliminaries One important task for you is to record the date and time the PartyStep 1 filed the protest or redress request.• Time stamp the protest form Be sure to record this information on the protest form or paper. Confirm that the protest form contains correct information: race number phone numbers representatives names etc.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 15Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 2-1 1
Protest Preliminaries Your next step is to find three people to serve on the protest committee.Step 2• Recruit three racing sailors for the PC Planning ahead is preferable, but can’t always be accomplished.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 16 Recruit PC Members You want knowledgeable people.Knowledgeable The protest committee should be well versed in the racing rules of • Racing Sailboats sailing which includes protest hearing • Racing Rules of Sailing procedures. • Protest Hearing Format You also want to make sure theAvoid Conflict of Interest protest committee has no Conflict of Interest. • Not in same class as Par es • Not related to either party Such as no member of the PC are • Not in business rela onship related (brother, sister, parent); or • Probably not a conflict, but consider work directly for one of the Parties. • In same fleet as Par es Sailing in the same fleet (not same class) could be a conflict.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 17Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 2-2 2
PC Member Roles A Protest Committee panel has three positions, sometimes referred to asChair the CHAIR, SCRIBE, and FACT FINDER.• Organizes and moderates hearing Usually, they are assigned their roles• Maintains decorum & procedure by the Overall Jury Chair or• Speaks for the Protest Commi ee Organizing Authority. Scribe • Listens! (but can s ll asks ques ons) • Take notes of • Tes mony • Facts found • People’s names and posi onsFact Finder • Boat types and sizes• Looks for • Points of agreement and departure between par es • Key ques on or issue emerging during evidence presented • Assists in ge ng witness / materialsPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 18 Protest Room A protest or redress hearing can be held almost anywhere.Where do we hold the Hearing?• Conference Room An excellent choice would be if your• Classroom club has an available office, junior pavilion, conference room, or• Outdoor space classroom. However, it does not have to be that formal. A sailboat cockpit, picnic table or even on the ground under a tree will work. You must be able to exclude witnesses from viewing or over hearing the testimony.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 19Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 2-3 3
Protest Room The important factors are PRIVATE and QUIET.Private and Quiet For example, away from the regatta Party.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 20 Hearing Room The protest committee members should sit on one side of the table.Room Set Up The PC CHAIR is usually in the middle,PC PC PC but does not have to be there. Model Boats NoR The protestor and protestee should sit on the other side of the table with SIs a chair in the middle saved for any witnesses.Protestor Witness Protestee In addition to paper and pencils forPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 21 notes, you will need a current rule book, copy of the NoR and SIs. Depending on the protest, a copy of the class rules might helpful. Model boats will also aid in incident discussion.Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 2-4 4
Before the Hearing You need to make sure that each Party has had an opportunity to readMake sure each Party: the protest. If there is a copy• Has a copy of, or an opportunity to read, machine readily available, it is best to make a copy of the protest form the protest (front side only) for all Parties and PC• Has had reasonable me to prepare members.Inform each Party when and where the You also need to make sure that thehearing will be held. Parties have had reasonable time to• Post Hearing Informa on on No ce Board prepare.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 22 Now that things are getting organized, you can schedule a Before the Hearing specific time for the hearing. Let all the Parties know where and whenProtest Hearing No ce (and Results) the protest hearing will be held. Besides telling them, it is a good practice to post the time and location on the Official Notice Board. US Sailing’s Judges website has many useful forms. http://www.ussailing.org/race- officials/judges/judge-guidelines/ This “Hearing Schedule and Results” form combines a hearing schedule with hearing decisions.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 23Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 2-5 5
3 – Holding Hearings Session 3 - Holding a Hearing Each boat may send one representative to the hearing.Star ng the Hearing• Make sure only ONE person from each This person does not have to be the skipper or helmsperson, but should boat is present almost always have been on the boat• Introduce the PC & Par es (see rule 63.3(a)).• Ask: Introduce everyone, PC members, protestor, and protestee. “Does anyone object to any member of this Protest Commi ee because s/he has a conflict of After introductions, ask both Parties interest? if any Party has any objections to any of the PC members on the basis of a Conflict of Interest.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 24 Validity: Protest or Redress Before getting into the details of the incident you must first check theFollow outline on back of protest form protest or redress validity. An easy way to work your way through the validity process is to flip the protest form over and answer the questions at the top of the form.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 25Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 3-1 1
Validity: Time Limits To be valid a protest or redress request must be filed within theProtest Time Limit protest time limit stated in the sailing instructions. • Stated in SIs • If none, two hours a er This is why it is very important that the time the PC received the protest the last boat in the race or redress got noted on the protest finishes form.Was protest filed in If someone delivers a protest aftera mely fashion? the end of the protest time limit, it is invalid unless there is good reason to • If not, PC shall extend extend the time. the me limit if there is good reason to do so. However, this is not a means to get rid of a protest as the PC SHALL extend if they find a good reason.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 26 Validity There are several good reasons for extending the protest time limit:Good Reasons to Extend Protest Filing Time • Injury An injury that needed attention, an • Onboard emergency onboard emergency such as a sinking • Logis cs boat or providing assistance to another vessel in distress.• Mul ple Marinas/Venues Logistics such as traffic problems may also be an issue if the race- course is remote or the protestor keeps his boat at a different marina. On the other hand, taking time to shower and clean-up is not a good reason for extending the time.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 27Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 3-2 2
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee Does the protest identify the natureLast Modified: 14 February 2017 of the incident? The protestor and protestee can be corrected prior to the hearing and most other details can be corrected during the hearing. Rule 61.2 clearly describes that the incident must be identified and the protest must be in writing. As described in Rule 62.2, redress requests have a parallel set of requirements (be in writing, identify the reason for making the request). The protestor is required by Rule 61.1 to inform the other boat of their intention to protest at the first reasonable opportunity. When a hail is required, it must contain the word “protest”. Yelling “foul… do your turns” is not a valid hail. The first reasonable opportunity means as soon as practical, not as soon as convenient. The protest committee must determine whether or not the hail was proper (Was the word “Protest” hailed?) and whether or not it was timely. © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. Page 3-3 3
Protest Validity: Hailing Protest The intent of the hail is to be sure the other boat clearly knows theFirst Reasonable Opportunity protestor’s intent to protest.Was the Hail suffic ent? A statement by the protestor that• Rule 61 requires that a boat shall “inform” they hailed protest is not necessarily in conflict with a statement by the the other boat protestee that they did not hear the• Considera ons hail. • What were Condi ons? The protest committee must apply a • What was Hailing Distance? test of reasonableness to each • Any obvious Injury or Damage? obligation. Was it reasonably possible for the protestor to hailDon’t Assume You Know Rule 61! protest and not be heard in the prevailing conditions? Was itPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 30 reasonable that the first opportunity to inform the other boat was not immediately?Protest Validity: Display Red Flag Rule 61.1(a) requires all boats six meters (that’s 19.685 feet) or greater Red Flag Required? to display a red flag when protesting. • Yes – if protes ng boat hull length is The sailing instructions or class rules six meters (19.68 may require other boats to display a feet) or greater red protest flag. • Yes – flag required by SIs This is very common with the Opti fleet. When dealing with dinghy fleets, be sure you know whether or not the SIs require protest flags.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 31Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 3-4 4
Protest Validity: Display Red Flag How soon must the red flag go up?Flag – When Required As with the hail, the flag is required• When (how long) a er the incident was at the “first reasonable opportunity”. the flag displayed? Just like with the hail, first reasonable opportunity means asFirst Reasonable Opportunity soon as practical; not as soon as• As soon as prac cal convenient.• NOT as soon as convenient …Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 32 Protest Validity: Display Red Flag The rule requires a red flag. All other colors are not acceptable.Possible Considera ons• Where on boat was flag displayed? Rule 61 requires the flag to be conspicuously displayed. • What were Condi ons? • Type & familiarity of boat The red flag is a form of communication telling the other boat• What did red flag look like? the protestor’s intent to protest. • Size – A flag adequate for an Op would The size and shape must be adequate not be conspicuous on a 60’ boat to get this message across. • Shape – must be recognizable as a flagPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 33Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 3-5 5
Validity: Other Requirements The sailing instructions may place other requirements on the protestingCheck Sailing Instruc ons boat.• Does a boat need to inform the race The protest committee must be commi ee finish boat of her intent to aware of other requirements. protest?• Were there any changes to required hail or display procedures?Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 34 Validity: Decisions Deciding the validity of a protest is often quite simple and straightRule 63.5 forward.• Decide whether or not the protest is valid If it seems obvious that the protest is valid, the PC Chair may glance at theConsidera ons rest of the PC to see if anyone would like to discuss any issue.• If necessary, excuse Par es and deliberate• If protest is not valid, the hearing shall be closed If not, the PC Chair can simply state• Once determined valid, do not let the subject be that the protest committee is satisfied that the protest is valid. introduced again unless truly new evidence is available However, there are times when the protest committee will need toPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 35 excuse the Parties and deliberate certain issues. If this is the case take your time and do it right the first time.Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 3-6 6
4 – Validity Exercise Validity DecisionsScenario: There are Three Protests Filed: 1) Speedy Gonzales vs. 2200 2) 1465 vs. You Dirty Bird 3) Fast Lane vs. Leave It Blank Each filing is a separate (and unrelated) circumstance or incident resulting in a protestDetermine: Facts to establish Protest Validity “Best Practice” Go through all points of validity before decisionOutcomes: Decision on Validity (and why) Consider issues faced by the protest committeePresented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 4-1
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 4-2
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 4-3
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 4-4
5 – Taking Evidence Session 5 - Taking Evidence Evidence consists of testimony of the Parties and witnesses, records suchRule 63.6 as race committee reports,• Taking Evidence & Finding Facts documents such as NoR and SIs, and any physical evidence presented suchConsidera ons as viewing the damage to a boat.• Be certain the informa on you s The PC should recognize that honest rely on is fir thand testimony can vary, even be in• Everyone should take notes conflict, as a result of different• Varying tes mony does not observations and recollections. necessarily mean that someone After all, if the Parties were in total is lying agreement, there would probably not be a protest.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 41Taking Evidence: Notes The PC needs to take notes as testimony is given by all Parties andSequen al Approach witnesses. Protestor Rules One approach uses the left side of the paper to write down the• Le Side 1. Both boats on 11, 17? (how o/lap testimony and evidence presented by starboard downwind created?) Parties and witnesses in a sequential, • Tes mony narrative order. 2. As approach mark, 18 on, 18.2?,• Right Side Bow 11 windward, overlap @ zone?, The right side of the paper is used to inside 18.4? proper jot down potential rules that might • Rules that might apply course? apply; relevant questions that occur • Relevant Ques ons 3. Bow 44 leeward, 11, 16, 17 to the Judge to ask when it becomes outside their turn; and to highlight any 18.2(b)? Last diverging areas or any key facts that 4. Bow 11 had overlap certainty? become apparent. at zone.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 42Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-1
Taking Evidence: Notes An alternative also divides the paper into two columns.Compara ve Notes Testimony and evidence given by the• Le Side Protestor Protestee protestor gets placed in the first • Protestor column. The testimony and evidence 1. Both boats on 1. Agree for the protestee is placed in the• Right Side starboard second column. • Protestee 2. Agree 2. Bow 11 on inside 3. Agree The notes are entered into the columns in a more or less 3. Bow 44 on outside chronological order, including the incident. You can line up the areas 4. Bow 11 had overlap 4. Disagree where the testimony is the same. at zone. Just as importantly, you need to note where the testimony differs orPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 43 diverges or where there is missing testimony or evidence.Taking Evidence: Using Models A beneficial approach has the Parties use model boats when giving theirUse model boats description of the incident.• Various sets may be purchased or made• Other Items work Model boat sets can be made or purchased. • Paper clips • Pens However, other items such as paper • Cups clips can be used as boats to show • US Sailing Grid their relative position to each other • Use phone to take picture of model and to marks.“Mix Up” boats between each set oftes mony to avoid presupposi onPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 44Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-2
Taking Evidence: Par es The protest process must be conducted under the principles of fairness andApproach sportsmanship.• Each Party tells their story Each participant is to be treated with • Protestor, first dignity and respect. The PC should • Protestee, second ensure that the Parties maintain a• Insist on politeness proper demeanor and attitude• Do not allow interrup ons towards each other.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 45 Do not allow any Party to intimidate or otherwise unreasonably influence the other Party. The objective is to listen to the evidence and develop a clear picture of what each Party thinks happened. During this part of the hearing a judge is starting to “see” the incident and determine which rules might apply. Taking Evidence: Par es People are often nervous and unfamiliar with the Hearing process.People & Tes mony: Always Remember! They also bring different • Individuals Describe Events Differently perspectives • People See Different Things • Honest Disagreements Exist One result is how well people • Folks Disagree on Rules that Apply express their recall of an event in a protest hearing. Deficiencies in expressing evidence should not be automatically taken as poor recall or poor situational awareness. The deficit could reflect instead a limitation in a person’s ability to express themselvesPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 46Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-3
Ques oning Par es Questions are permitted after the protestor and protestee have givenOrder of Ques oning: their opening statements and • Protestee asks ques ons of protestor descriptions of the incident. • Protestor asks ques ons of protestee • PC ques ons the protestor The PC Chair should try to limit • PC ques ons the protestee editorial statements and restrict questioning to pertinent questionsBy holding off their ques ons un l last, the and answers.PC avoids “coaching” the Par es on howthey are approaching the evidence … Do not allow argumentative questions, interruptions, or badgering!Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 50 Ques oning Considera ons Judges should limit their questions to helping to determine which rulesApproaches in Formula ng Ques ons: applied as the situation developed or • What rule might apply to this incident? to determine how credible a person’s • Who has obliga ons under those rules? evidence is about what happened • What facts are needed to determine during the incident. whether the boats met these obliga ons? Where were they sitting on the boat? • What ques ons will help establish those facts? Could they see clearly what was happening? What were they doing at the time (e.g., trimming sails, etc.)?Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 51Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-4
Ques oning Considera ons You do not want to influence the testimony by the wording of yourApproaches in Formula ng Ques ons: questions. • What rule might apply to this incident? • Who has obliga ons under those rules? At worst you could be “coaching” the • What facts are needed to determine Parties on how you are approaching whether the boats met these the evidence being presented. obliga ons? • What ques ons will help establish those facts?Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 51 Ques oning Considera ons The question ‘Had the boats reached the zone when the overlap wasPresupposi ons: established?’ presupposes the overlap.• A ques on with a presupposi on may lead the person to view the presupposi on as accurate. Witnesses are likely to accept the • No “Had the boats reached the zone presupposed overlap to be true. when the overlap was established?” • Yes “Posi on the two boats rela ve to A better approach asks the Party to each other when the lead boat reached the ‘position the boats relative to each zone” other when the lead boat entered the zone’ without suggesting an• A ques on with a false presupposi on can overlap or not. influence the Party or Witness the other wayPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 53Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-5
Ques oning Considera ons Multiple choice questions also influence the response.Avoid Mul ple Choice Ques ons• Should not be allowed The question, ‘How many lengths, 1,• Can influence tes mony into a certain range 2, or 3?’ will lead to a smaller number than the question, ‘How • No “How many boat lengths 1, 2, or 3?” many lengths, 1, 5, or 10?’ • No “How many boat lengths 1, 5, or 10?” • Yes “How many boat lengths?” So ask the question without implying a certain range.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 54Ques oning Considera ons The question asked can lead to different answers, based on theLanguage Can Support a Posi on wording chosen.No How far apart? Leads to a large response. The question, “How far apart?” willNo How close? Leads to a small response. lead witnesses to respond with a greater number than the question,Yes Posi on the two boats rela ve to “how close?” each other. The choice of verbs can lead theNo How fast were the boats traveling Yields a higher es mate of witness. when Blue smashed into Yellow? speed. The question, “How fast were theYes What was the speed of the boats boats travelling when blue ‘smashed’ when contact occurred? into yellow?” yields a higher estimate of speed than the same sentence using the verbs, ‘collided’, ‘bumped’, ‘made contact’ or ‘hit’.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 55Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-6
Ques oning Considera ons To reiterate:Cau ons in Evalua ng Evidence People testifying in a hearing can be• The PC can make judgments about the nervous or unfamiliar with the Hearing process. credibility of evidence based on style and presenta on of evidence. A good and effective PC member will• Par es and witnesses who express their recognize when this is occurring and opinions confidently are o en given more make sure that they can separate weight than someone who is less forceful delivery from the facts. and less believable.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 56Ques oning Approaches The PC members may then ask questions about conflictingAsk Time, Distance, & Speed Ques ons statements or actions.Boat Speed Distance Boat Speed Distance If the Parties disagree on distances, (knots) (feet/second) (knots) (feet/second) times or boat speeds, the PC Chair 1 7 may demonstrate the use of speed 2 1.7 8 11.7 and distance calculations. 3 3.3 9 13.3 4 5.O 10 15.0 For example, describing how 6 knots 5 6.7 11 16.7 of boat speed equates to 10 feet per 6 8.3 12 18.3 second and relating this to distance. 10.0 20.0 If there was ‘dialogue’ on the course, consider timing how long it takes to repeat that dialogue.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 57Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-7
Taking Evidence of Witnesses When the PC has the facts as alleged by each Party, the PC Chair shouldCall Witnesses ONE at a me ask whether the protestor wishes to call any witnesses.Order:• Protestor’s Witnesses Typically, first the protestor, then the• Protestee’s Witnesses protestee calls witnesses, one at a time.PC member (NOT the Party) brings thewitness into the room In addition, the PC may wish to call its own witnesses.PC can find/invite witnesses• Other boats For each witness called, the PC Chair• RC folks should get the name of the witness and have a PC member find (orPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 58 summon) the witness. Do not permit the Party to summon their own witness! Taking Evidence of Witnesses The decision to call a Party’s witness is left to that Party. Rule 63.6 (TakingHow many witnesses? Evidence and Finding Facts)• As many as the par es want to call mandates that the PC shall take• PC can not prevent any witness from evidence from the Parties and their witnesses. tes fying or providing evidence• The PC also may call witnesses (rule 63.6) The Parties may call as many witnesses (one at a time) as theyPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 59 wish. The PC Chair may suggest that the Parties call only witnesses that will add to or clarify the testimony, but the PC must not deny the opportunity to call witnesses. Any such suggestion is best made in the form of a question: “will this witness tell us anything new that we have not already heard from other witnesses?”Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-8
Taking Evidence of Witnesses While summoning a witness, have one of the other PC members shuffleUse Model Boats the position of the model boats.• Shuffle them before each witness enters You want the witness to tell the storySet the stage: as they saw it happen without being• We are talking about an incident that influenced by how a prior witness might have positioned the boats. occurred at the “X” mark during the “Y” race. Seat the witness between the twoAsk: Parties. Ask the witness for their• Where were you? name and position on the boat.• Tell us what you saw? State who called the witness and identify the incident in question. ForWitness tells story uninterrupted consistency, tell the witness which color model represents which boat.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 60 Then ask the witness to tell what they know about the incident. Ques oning the Witnesses Invite questioning first by the other Party and then by the Party whoOrder of Ques oning: called the witness. 1. Other party ques ons the witness 2. Calling party ques ons the witness Each Party should be cautioned to 3. PC ques ons the witness avoid asking leading questions of the witness. The PC Chair should also remind the questioning Party to ask questions and not make additional statements. The PC Chair may interrupt the testimony to maintain proper decorum, questions and answers. Finally, the PC Chair Invites the PC to question the witness.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 61Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-9
Summary Statements When the protest committee has obtained all the evidence, the PCOnce all Par es and Witnesses shave had a Chair invites the Parties to makechance to provide tes mony and offer their final statementevidence, the PC Chair asks the Par es tobriefly summarize what they believe are the The final statement order would beimportant informa on and issues. the protestor first, followed by the• Protestor, firt protestee.• Protestee, secondPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 62 Summary Statements The PC Chair instructs the Parties that their final statement should be• PC Chair stresses this is summary only – no limited to relevant rules and appeals need to repeat the tes mony that apply and key facts for the PC to consider.• No interrup ons or badgering during summary The Parties should tell the jury why they should prevail, not what• No Party is required to make a summary happened. statement The PC Chair should restrict a Party to a summary only and stop any Party repeating evidence already heard.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 63Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 5-10
6 – Deliberations Session 6 - Delibera ons After taking all the evidence, the PC has the responsibility to find the factsEntering Delibera ons Phase… and make a decision.• Chair explains the PC will now review the The PC should conduct the decision- tes mony and evidence, and from these, making process in private. find the facts, apply the rules, and reach a decision The PC should weigh all testimony• Chair requests that Par es remain in with equal care and recognize that vicinity in case PC has any addi onal honest testimony can vary, and even ques ons be in conflict, as a result of different• Chair excuses Par es observations and recollections.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 64 Delibera ons Often the entire panel has privately reached the same facts andFollow the Protest Form conclusion.• Find Facts Considerable time can be saved if the• Draw Conclusions PC Chair asks for their decision. If• Apply the Rules everyone has come to the same• Decide Protest conclusion, then writing the facts and conclusions goes very quickly. However, if PC members do not see the situation the same way, then they can quickly refocus on the differences at hand.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 65Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-1
Delibera ons: Finding Facts When writing facts, the PC must be careful that each is a fact and not aWhat are Facts? Usually, there only conclusion or an interpretation.• An ac on or condi on the PC a few “Key Facts” In the context of rule 63.6 and other finds occurred or existed rules using the term, a “fact” is an action or condition that a PC “finds” • An actual and absolute reality occurred or existed. • Informa on obtained or logically Usually there are only a few “key deduced from the evidence facts” in an incident. Determining• Caveat: Facts (and Conclusions) these can be the hard part! • Not determined by whether or not tes mony from all par es and witnesses agrees or disagreesPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 66Delibera ons: Facts If a “fact” has words such as “ample” and “adequate” in it, it probably isFacts need to be specific: not a fact but a conclusion. Yes Boat A was 5 feet directly ahead of “Ample time” should be replaced Boat B with an exact time if the statement is to become a fact. No Boat A was keeping clear of Boat B If an exact time or distance is not Yes There was contact between 63252’s known, a fact may use “at port spreader and 93081’s spinnaker. approximately one boat length” and A er contact there was a 2 foot slit in still qualify as a fact. the spinnaker No Sail 63252 struck 93081 causing damagePresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 67Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-2
Delibera ons: Facts For facts use short, simple, declarative statements withWhen wri ng facts: quantitative adjectives. • Use simple declara ve statements • Avoid complex sentences We’ll discuss differences between • Prefer quan ta ve adjec ves instead of facts and conclusions or facts and qualita ve adjec ves interpretations shortly.Don’t mix: • Facts and conclusions • Facts with interpreta onsPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 68Delibera ons: Facts The Scribe (or PC Chair) should state, and at the same time write, aSequen ally list each specific fact or facts in complete description of the incident on the basis of the testimony anda progressive order. evidence. 1. Two Finns were midway up the first weather leg of race 2 Use the models and notes to re-enact in 5 knots of breeze and no current the incident to scale (hint: take a photo of the layout you develop). 2. Finn 999 was close hauled on starboard tack (ST) 3. Finn 888 was closed hauled on port tack (PT) As the PC goes through the incident, 4. Finn 999 and 888 were on a collision course they determine which rules are in 5. At 1 boat length separa on, ST Finn 999 changed course play and follows through each boat’s rights and obligations as they change. to leeward of PT Finn 888. 6. At closest distance between the two boats, Finn 999’s Apply relevant rules to these facts and identify any missing facts. starboard gunwale was within 6 inches of Finn 888’s starboard stern 7. No contact occurredPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 69Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-3
Delibera ons: Facts The PC may choose to layout the model boats to help clarify theirUse model boats to help clarify facts understanding of the evidence presented. Doing so may illustrate areas of key facts or testimony that does not agree with the speed and conditions of the boats on the race-course. An “endorsed” diagram IS a Fact! Hint: When doing so, use your camera or phone to take a few “bird’s eye” views of the resulting diagram.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 70Delibera ons: Facts Should any member not agree on some point, or believe there is aPanel Disagrees or Believes an Essen al Fact missing essential fact, the PC should discuss that point until reaching anMissing? agreement.• Discuss that point un l agreement• Try to reach unanimity Try to obtain unanimity among the• Use ‘last point of certainty’ PC.• Assess weight of conflic ng evidence Establish the most likely scenario byAs Needed backing up to the last point of• Recall Par es (or, if recalling a Witness, all certainty; assess the weight of the conflicting evidence. Par es as well) to focus on point of If necessary, recall the Parties (or disagreement or missing fact witnesses) to obtain any missing information. (If a witness, all Parties need to be present as well).Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 72Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-4
Delibera ons: Conclusions Once the PC have deliberated the finding of the facts, the Scribe shouldConclusions read them aloud; giving the PC• An Opinion, Inference, or Deduc on members one (hopefully) last chance• Not a Fact (… usually) to propose a change.This is where the PC can add their Once recording and agreeing to theinferences, judgments and conclusions facts, the PC Chair can suggest aregarding the facts. decision and reasons for the decision.Concentrate on rights and obliga ons of thePar es The reasons for the decision are referred to as the “conclusions.”Relate the facts to the rulesPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 73 Delibera ons: Conclusions The vast majority of conclusions involve judgments that include non-What is a conclusion? factual elements or are not directly derived from facts.• A conclusion can also be par ally or wholly non- factual, as when a judgment is made that includes These should not be included in the non-factual elements listing of “facts found.”Example: Hint:• “Boat A changed course so abruptly that it was not ISAF Case 104 provides some reasonably possible for Boat B to avoid the collision” authoritative interpretations and considerations in this area.Conclusion Based On: • A combina on of the facts about the incident • An interpreta on of the phrase “she shall give the other boat room to keep clear in rule 16.1”Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 74Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-5
Delibera ons: Conclusions Conclusions help the PC to decide who broke a rule and/or who shouldImportant to decide be penalized.• who broke a rule• who should be penalized Hint:Rules = Conclusion language! Most Part 2 rules use phrases that• Boat could be construed as conclusions: • Kept clear or did not keep clear “… shall keep clear …” • Gave room (mark room) or did not give “… give the other boat room …” room • En tled to room or not en tled to room “… shall avoid contact …” “… shall give the inside boat mark- room …”Facts must lead to ConclusionsPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 76 Delibera ons: Applicable Rules Rule 64.1 (Penalties and Exoneration) requires a PC to consider allApplicable Rules applicable rules that may have been• Must be evident in the facts found broken by a boat that is a Party to the hearing. • Example: A boat cannot break Rule 10 without facts finding one boat on A PC will often find that a boat broke starboard tack and the other on port more than one rule, and must cite all tack applicable rules that were broken in the decision.• Cite all applicable rules for the incident Well-written decisions mention each rule that each boat is obligated to meet, and then state whether or not the boat fulfilled that obligation.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 77Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-6
Delibera ons: Decisions The decision describes the result of the hearing and whether the protestWhat is the Decision? is upheld or denied.• Protest dismissed (no boat broke a rule)• Protest upheld One or more boats may be disqualified or given some other • Rules broken applicable penalty under rule 64.1 • Any penal es that apply to boat(s) (Penalties and Exoneration).Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 78Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 6-7
7 – Facts & ConclusionsExercises:7-A: Group Consensus on Facts vs. Conclusions Select “F” or “C” Compare with the entire Group7-B: Team Exercise on Facts vs. Conclusions Incident involves three boats rounding a leeward mark Reorder into a proper written decision containing sections on: • Facts Found • Conclusions • DecisionPresented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 7-1
7-A – Facts vs. ConclusionsCircle “F” if the statement is a Fact, or “C” if the statement is a Conclusion:F C Jack and Jill were both sailing Lasers.F C Jill hailed \"protest\" loudly immediately after the collision.F C The protest is valid.F C The wind was approximately 8 knots.F C About one minute before the starting signal, both boats were on a beam reach on starboard tack four boat lengths below the middle of the starting line with Jack clear astern of Jill.F C Jack was sailing faster than Jill and sailed into a leeward overlap position.F C At the time the overlap was established, Jack gave Jill adequate room to keep clear.F C Both boats sailed overlapped on parallel courses four feet apart for approximately 15 seconds.F C At that point, Jack changed course sharply to windward, sailing from a beam reach to ten degrees above close-hauled.F C Jill immediately pushed her tiller hard to leeward and trimmed her sail, but contact occurred less than two seconds after Jack's change of course.F C Jack did not give Jill room to keep clear.F C The collision caused serious damage to Jill’s boat.F C There was a gouge approximately 30 centimeters long on the port side of Jill's boat approximately one meter from the transom. The gouge also had a hole through the hull about 5 centimeters long.Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 7-2
7-B - Facts vs. Conclusions1. Boat B rounded clear astern of Boat A2. The current was slack.3. Boat A and Boat B were overlapped bow to bow at the zone4. Boat A, who had not come from clear astern, was to leeward of Boat B5. By sailing a full boat length past the mark, she sailed well past her proper course and in doing so broke rule 18.46. Boat C, who was clear astern of A & B at the zone, sailed directly to the leeward mark and rounded the mark approximately three meters ahead of Boat A7. Boat B was required to keep clear of Boat A by RRS 11 and was required by RRS 18.2(b) to give Boat A room to round the mark, and she did so.8. Boat A continued sailing on starboard tack until her stern was over one boat length beyond the mark, before gybing to round the mark.9. Boats A, B, and C were all on a starboard tack broad reach approaching the leeward mark, which was to be left to port.10. Boat A is disqualified for breaking RRS 18.411. There was no contact between any of the boats.12. When Boat A entered the zone, she had right of way over both B (RRS 11) and C (RRS 12)13. The wind was SW at 10 knots.14. At the zone, Boat C was one-half boat length clear astern of Boats A & B.15. Boat C was required by RRS 12 and 18.2(c) to keep clear of Boat A and Boat B and she did so. Boat C did not break a rule.16. All the boats were J70s.17. The current was not a factor18. While A was right-of-way and entitled to mark-room, she was also obligated by rule 18.4 to sail no further from the mark than needed to sail her proper course before she gybed.Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 7-3
8 – Informing & Closing Session 8 - Informing the Par es The Parties are recalled when the committee is satisfied with its• PC brings all Par es back to Hearing room decision.• Chair: The facts found shall be read to the • Thanks all Par es for their involvement Parties along with the decision and in the Hearing the reason for the decision. • Reads the facts found • Describes conclusions • Lists applicable rules associated with each boat • Announces decisionPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 89Informing the Par es: Example This is an example of the information verbally provided to the Parties.Facts Found1. In race 3, two Finns were midway up the first weather leg in 12 knots of breeze and no current Notice that when creating Conclusions, a good practice is to try2. Finn 999 was close hauled on starboard tack (ST) to use the actual language of the3. Finn 888 was closed hauled on port tack (PT) applicable rule itself.4. Finn 999 and 888 were on a collision course5. At 1 boat length separa on, ST Finn 999 changed course to leeward of PT Finn 888. Sometimes PC Decisions might6. At closest distance between the two boats, Finn 999’s starboard gunwale was within 3 inches combine the Rule and Conclusion into a single statement: “Rule 10 of Finn 888’s starboard stern required port tack 888 to keep clear7. No contact occurred of starboard tack 999. As 999 needed to take avoiding action, 888 did notConclusions do so.” Or similar approaches.• Finn 888, on port-tack, did not keep clear of Finn 999, on starboard-tack.• Once it was clear Finn 888 was not keeping clear, ROW Finn 999 made an avoiding maneuver to avoid contact.Applicable Rules• Rule 10 (On Opposite Tacks) and Rule 14 (Avoiding Contact)Decision• Protest Upheld: Finn 888 is to be scored DSQ in Race 3 of seriesPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 90Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 8-1
Closing the Hearing The protest hearing should be formally closed after informing theA er informing the Par es of the facts Parties of the decision.found, rules, conclusions, and decision, theChair should formally Close the Hearing assoon as possible.“This hearing is closed.”Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 91 What if Par es have Ques ons? If a Party to the protest requires clarification, this should be given• The PC can (but does not have immediately (if at all). to) entertain ques ons from the Par es. However, no further discussion should be permitted at this time.• When answering ques ons, avoid: • Trying to jus fy facts found or how they were reached • Ge ng into discussions and debatesPresented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 92Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 8-2
What if Par es are Upset? Whether or not, and to what extent, discussion with a dissatisfied Party at• If a Party disagrees with your a future time should be permitted, decision, respec ully will depend on the experience and acknowledge that you understand confidence of the Chair and PC what they are saying, but that is members not how the PC saw the facts. Permitting an informal discussion• Reiterate that the Hearing has been closed. with the PC, and setting a time for• Some mes suggest a cooling off e riod: “I this discussion after announcing the protest decision can often defuse a understand your posi ons and will be willing to stressful atmosphere; conversely, speak to you about them later.” refusing any future discussion can often exacerbate the bad feeling.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 93 Alternatively, a PC member may be A er the Hearing appointed to informally explain a decision.• Post decisions on Protest No ce Board The PC should never under any ü Enter decision in “Results” column on “Hearing circumstances discuss any dissension Schedule And Results” form used to provide the outside the PC panel. schedule of protest hearings After the hearing is over, there are• Provide any scoring changes to the event still a few administrative duties. Scorer Most important are any scoring• Ensure that scoring changes actually get changes. All jury decisions should be placed into the scores! brought to the scorers’ attention promptly.Presented by US Sailing Judges Commi ee (v January 1, 2017) © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved. 94Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 8-3
9 – Fact FindingExercises: Finding Facts & Making DecisionsRead World Sailing Case 50There are Five Protests filed: • #1 Sue vs Penny (Instructor Chairs hearing) • #2 Sweetie vs Peaches • #3 Yellow vs Blue • #4 Victory vs POSH • #5 Oscar vs IndiaEach filing is separate (and unrelated) IncidentObjectives: • Organize two panels. One panel hears #2 & 3 the other panel hears #4 & 5 • Determine Facts & Decision on IncidentOutcomes: • Given your Facts, could a Different Panel reach the same Decision? • Each Panel will review the other Panel’s Facts to make a DecisionPresented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-1
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-2
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-3
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-4
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-5
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-6
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-7
Presented by US Sailing Judges Committee © 2017 US Sailing – All rights reserved.Last Modified: 14 February 2017 Page 9-8
Search
