tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post8137214094722348979..comments2024-01-22T09:45:29.790+01:00Comments on Racing Rules of Sailing - Look to Windward: The Last of the Royal Snooty NoseJoshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10346870418220762709noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post-28181117806692023452009-03-11T04:10:00.000+01:002009-03-11T04:10:00.000+01:00Norms certainly vary. Guidance is provided in teh...Norms certainly vary. Guidance is provided in teh ISAF Judges Manual 12.2.4 and the RYA Misconduct Guidance (8.2 and 8.3 new version and Question 1.4 old version). Briefly, it is when the misdeed is sufficiently associated, in the eyes of the public with the event or with the sport. That is what the PC will have to decide.<BR/><BR/>A PC is not bound by the rules of evidence. There is nothing wrong with hearing evidence from an interested party: it is up to the PC to give the appropriate weight to any evidence it hears. Certainly independent evidence is good.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9170261917486213112.post-82955286285918566712009-03-10T08:30:00.000+01:002009-03-10T08:30:00.000+01:001. If a breach of good manners rises to the level ...1. If a breach of good manners rises to the level of a breach of criminal law, when might it tend to bring the sport into disrepute? Paradoxically, would the same violation not bring the sport into disrepute if it is handled quietly ("hushed up"), but would bring disrepute if police were called? National norms and laws may vary greatly, as well as club norms.<BR/><BR/>2. Would any special considerations apply to handling evidence provided by an "interested party", that is, the example of asking the Commodore about club norms? Would the evidence be less subject to being attacked as biased if it were supplemented by evidence from a non-interested party?Pathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13417115374524861438noreply@blogger.com