Charges: None yet

Trial Procedure:

a. Prosecution presents claim

b. Defendant enters plea. Pleas will be Guilty, Not Guilty, no-contest.

c. Prosecution presents evidence, and calls witnesses.

d. Defense cross examination.

e. Defendant presents evidence, and calls witnesses.

f. Prosecution cross examination.

g. Prosecution closing statement

h. Defendant closing statement.

[i and j: I decide and post the verdict, see link for more details]

You may decide to come to a plea agreement at any time and the prosecution may drop charges, up until a verdict is posted.

I am required to post the process for a retrial in absentia threads, for some reason, so here that is:

D. Retrials

i. If there is new evidence that suggests that an individual convicted of a crime is innocent, they may demand a retrial in which any new evidence may be presented. Such a trial shall be conducted in the same way as a regular trial. If the individual is not convicted in the new trial, they shall be cleared of the crime in question and all punishments shall be lifted immediately.

ii. Mistrials

a. Following the completion of a trial, should any citizen feel that the ruling or process by which the trial was conducted violated the constitutional rights of either the defendant or the plaintiff or otherwise significantly undermined fair treatment or due process under the law violate the constitutional rights given to the defendant(s), they may initiate a vote to declare it a mistrial. The request should be made on the trial's verdict subreddit thread and should alert the mayor and the two non-presiding judges with /u/[user] tags.

b. The vote will be held between the two non-presiding judges and the Mayor in reply to the request on the verdict subreddit thread and will require 2 "aye" votes to be declared a mistrial. A lack of response within 3 days (72 hours) will be recorded as a "nay" vote. Sentences are assumed to remain valid during voting.

c. After a trial has been declared a mistrial, all proceedings of the trial and any rulings are declared invalid and a new trial is held. The judge of the previous trial may not again preside over the retrial.

According to the constitution, this trial is currently happening, but otherwise follows the exact same procedure as regular trials.

The text is confusing as hell, but since none of this would make any sense if not for the following interpretation... I am going to consider the trial to have begun already. Thus, the prosecution is already on the clock for posting claims, even though they have not identified themselves yet. Otherwise there would be no purpose to having trials in absentia at all, so this is the only plausible interpretation I can see.

Thus, the defendant will be released in 2 days for violation of right to a speedy trial, unless a valid plaintiff (victim of the defendant) somewhere out there shows up and presents claims.