Okay... now I've played a Tribunal, and it says pretty clear, in so many words, you witness the crime, you mark someone. The Justiciar can do all the detective work should there be any question. What has pissed me off for a long time, is the way non-Justiciars go about handling crimes they didn't witness. If it's someone they like, they'll investigate the crime, and if someone who was in UDGAARD when the crime happened says he saw something, the person is marked, whereas if they DON'T like the person, they wont even investigate, saying they don't have the power. It doesn't even necessarily have to be a like and dislike situation, but the fact is, there should be a line drawn. Either you can investigate crimes and mark people, or you can't. It should be that simple.
Prime Example...
I blind some guy in town. A little while later, A Provincial marks me for "trying to assassinate in town". He said many people witnessed and heard the assassination, and my pet, of all things, was the final witness, because it was tracking. Okay first off, yes, I commited a crime, *but he doesn't even know what crime*!. How can you even say that, in this case, a nightwalker is a witness? For the most part, they don't talk, and it will track anyone I've attacked. I could have attacked some guy in arkham and my nightwalker would still be tracking him in Galadon. Then there's the fact I was WANTED for the wrong crime. That proves that anyone could have gotten a group of people together, said I did it, he sees my Nightwalker tracking, and I was WANTED. Personally, that's bull, because being WANTED has a big affect on your char IC and OOC, as far as the things you can do and places you can go, so it should be clear line whether or not someone other than the Justiciar has the authority to come in after an attack and give out warrants based on word of ear.

Dont take this the wrong way, but I think you should send a note to the Provost in an IC manner regarding the crime and in all fairness, he should at least investigate it. You seem to take every little problem you have and blow it out of proportion on the forums here.

If you have a problem with something, one way not to get it looked at is ranting like a madman.
(Re: Valg's post -http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=4555&mesg_id=4555)

Just a suggestion as you seem to post here a lot and aren't afraid to express your opinion.

I have no idea what situation you're talking about, but I assume you tried to talk to the Provost about it before brining it here. That sort of thing should be handled by the mortal leaders, and since they didn't bring anything to me for more questioning, it's probably been resolved already, so I'll only say this:

Investigating a crime you did not witness has been allowed for ages. It is, however, deliberately left open for magistrates to decide. I would accept a Magistrate not flagging anyone unless they themselves heard the crime, and I would accept a Magistrate who was willing to go into in-depth investigations to figure out what happened in their jurisdiction while they were gone. Obviously, the one who dives into investigations would be more likely to become, say, a Justiciar eventually, but there is nothing wrong with the other approach (or one inbetween, that investigated sometimes, as long as they had a justification for it). In the Hall of the Justiciar (and Vindicator), it specifically states that a Magistrate should try to live like a Just/Vind would, should they seek to reach one of those positions.

Velk