On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote: > Y'know, after reading R2230 (the NOV rule) I don't know that the above > did anything (which is somewhat ironic given the nature of the dispute > over this NOV). If the above failed to initiate a criminal case I do > the following:
Contesting it without raising a criminal case makes it Contested. If the accuser (or others) accept your explanation when you contest it, and no one initiates a criminal case, it stays contested and no rests are applied. The additional step of raising the criminal case is only needed if the accuser isn't satisfied with your explanation and wants to call in a judge to determine if the guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt (or you anticipate that the accuser won't be satisfied, so you do it yourself just to keep the process moving). -G.
