What do we need to prove?

Guest post by Brass
When we begin hearing a protest, after (of course) carefully doing the rule M2 and M3.1 stuff, we often rush in to get to the ‘meat’ of the protest. This usually works OK on a simple Part 2 protest because the basic facts usually ‘fall out’ from the protest form and the party’s stories, and the basic facts necessary to reach the conclusions are few and simple: who was on port and starboard, windward or leeward, inside and outside and so on. We can get by on sort of unstructured instinct to ask the right questions to get all the necessary facts.
When we get to some of the more complex rules, however, it gets more complicated, and to get sufficient proof of the necessary facts requires some thought and planning before we are confronted with the parties and the witnesses.
At a recent judges seminar there was discussion about how to approach protests about complex rules. The following process was recommended:

1. Identify the rule or rules that might apply;
2. Examine each of these rules and list the elements or ‘ingredients’ that are required to constitute breaking the rule,
3. Consider the facts needed to establish each of the ‘ingredients’, and how those facts may be proved, for example evidence of witnesses, results sheets, measurement certificates and so on
4. Plan questions to witnesses to get them to provide the necessary facts. Plan and ask only those questions that are necessary.

Extracting the elements or ingredients from a complex rule is sometimes difficult but can be made easier by using a systematic process. We can go through the rule and highlight or underlining key words and phrases. We can then list out short sentences saying what has to be proved
Examples
Let us consider some examples.
Rule 31
While racing, a boat shall not touch a starting mark before starting, a mark that begins, bounds or ends the leg of the course on which she is sailing, or a finishing mark after finishing.
Rule 31 says that, while racing, a boat shall not touch

• A starting mark before starting; or
• A mark that begins, bounds, or ends the leg of the course on which she is sailing, which, of course, includes a starting mark which begins the first leg after a boat has started and cleared it, and a finish mark which ends the last leg until a boat has finished; or
• A finish mark after finishing.

To systematically prove that a boat broke rule 31, we must:

1. prove that the boat was racing, that is, looking at the definition of racing, that she was
• entered in the race, or intending to race in the race, AND
• after her preparatory signal, AND
• before she had finished and cleared the finish line and marks, AND
• not in general recall, postponement or abandonment; 
  
2. Choose which of the above alternatives applies (starting mark, finish mark, mark bounding a leg)
   AND THEN
3. prove that the mark the boat is alleged to have hit was that type of mark;
   AND
4. prove that the boat hit the mark.

Rule 49.2 is a somewhat more complex example.
Rule 49.2
When lifelines are required by the class rules or the sailing instructions they shall be taut, and competitors shall not position any part of their torsos outside them, except briefly to perform a necessary task. On boats equipped with upper and lower lifelines of wire, a competitor sitting on the deck facing outboard with his waist inside the lower lifeline may have the upper part of his body outside the upper lifeline.
Rule 49.2 says that:

1. to be subject to this rule the class rules or the sailing instructions must require lifelines; and
2. the lifelines shall be taut; and
3. competitors shall not position any part of their torsos outside them, except that
4. competitors may position part of their torsos outside lifelines briefly to perform a necessary task; and
5. where boats are equipped with upper and lower lifelines of wire, competitors may sit on the deck facing outboard with their waists inside the lower lifeline and their upper parts of their bodies outside the upper lifeline

To systematically prove that a boat broke the first part of rule 49.2, we must:
1. prove that the boat was racing, because rule 49.2 is a rule of Part 4 and the Preamble to Part 4 says that Part 4 Rules apply only to boats racing: to prove that a boat was racing we must prove, looking at the definition of racing, that she was

• entered in the race, or intending to race in the race, AND
• after her preparatory signal, AND
• before she had finished and cleared the finish line and marks, AND
• not in general recall, postponement or abandonment;

AND
2. prove that:

• the class rules applied and required lifelines, OR
• the sailing instructions required lifelines;

AND
3. prove that:

• lifelines were not fitted, OR
• ifelines that were fitted were not taut, OR
• a competitor positioned some part of his or her torso outside the lifelines, AND
• this was other than briefly to perform a necessary task, OR
• this was other than as permitted by the second part of rule 49.2, that is:
• there were upper and lower lifelines AND
• the lifelines were of wire AND
• the competitor was not sitting on the deck facing outboard with his or her waist inside the lower lifeline and the upper part of his or her body outside the upper lifeline

Exercise
As an exercise, analyze the elements or ingredients of rule 69.1(a) that must be proved before a Protest Committee may take the action described in rule 69.1(b)

.