See here for essential background: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-shill-squad-3-tribunal.html.
I have been making some plans for the structure of the Shill Tribunal that I describe in the background links above. These are just my own basic and interim plan and further details can be worked out in the future with the cooperation of others. These latest plans concern personnel. In a courtroom there are always numerous people. How many and what role they play all depend on the type of court it is and the legal system it is under. It is a good enough starting point for me to use this as a model. Below is a list of the personnel in the Shill Tribunal according to my current model, who they might be and what their job will entail. I have drawn up a diagram of the system in the Illustration above.
The Judge in the Shill Tribunal will be very different to any you will find in a normal court because the Tribunal will have no judicial power, just like the Jewish and Muslim courts I describe in the above background links. The role of the Judge will be to organize a hearing and ensure that good order is maintained at all times. Obviously he or she will have no power to deliver a sentence, except personal ones between themselves and the convict. For example, if the Judge is a Facebook group admin they can ban the convict from their group. After a hearing, the prime duty of the Judge will be to announce the verdict of the Shill Tribunal and publish it as far and widely as possible. This is really all that can be done in terms of enforcement.
This is the person accused of an offence and committed to the Shill Tribunal for a hearing.
This is the person who is presenting the case for the defence, in the same way a Barrister does in a Crown Court. They will also get the chance to cross-examine the Accuser, the Defendant and all witnesses. Alternatively the Defendant can opt to play this role themselves, in which case their Advocate can remain within the hearing as their informal supporter if the Defendant wants this.
This is the person bringing the case against the Defendant. They must submit their application to the Judge who will then investigate and set up the hearing.
This is the person who is presenting the case for the prosecution, in the same way a Criminal Barrister does in a Crown Court. They will also get the chance to cross-examine the Defendant, Accuser and all witnesses. Alternatively the Accuser can opt to play this role themselves, in which case their Advocate can remain within the hearing as their informal supporter if the Accuser wants this.
The Jury are the people who decide on the verdict. I'm not sure at the moment how many people should be on the Jury. It might even vary from hearing to hearing. I believe there should be some ground rules when it comes to their selection: 1. They should not be partners or relatives of the Accuser or Defendant. 2. They should not be on the friends list of the Accuser or Defendant. 3. They need to have a foundational knowledge the special interest of the Accuser or Defendant, for example UFOlogy, Bigfoot, vaccine dangers etc. The Judge should approach these people in a random manner and ask them to become Jurors of a Shill Tribunal hearing. If they agree then it will be necessary for the Accuser and Defendant and/or their Advocates to approve them as Jurors.
These are anybody else the Accuser's or Defendant's Advocates choose to call the hearing to give testimony if they think it will help their client's position.
Another question is, where and how do the hearings take place. This could be done in the real world by hiring a function room somewhere and the hearing personnel meeting up there, but this will probably be too difficult and expensive in most instances. I believe it is perfectly suitable for hearings to be conducted online via an internet communication service such as Skype, the former Google Hangouts or Zoom. I am very keen on the idea of a public trial and believe the proceedings should be published, in real-time by livestream if possible. This may not be an option if large numbers of personnel are needed in a session of the hearing on the same call; in which case the proceedings should be recorded and uploaded as soon as possible afterwards. The Judge alone must be responsible for this and ensure that no editing of recordings takes place. There is, of course, a lot more that needs to be worked out in this process and my ideas here are just the start, but I like what I have concocted and welcome feedback from readers. We do have a necessity to get this system up and running as soon as possible because there are so many people in the UFO/Paranormal/Conspiracy Theory community who could be described as "pending trial", people who will theoretically be good candidates for Defendants; for example: Larry Warren, Darren Perks, Simon Parkes, Miles Johnston... and of course, myself.
See here for additional background: http://hpanwo-radio.blogspot.com/2017/01/programme-219-podcast-2016-review-of.html.