Quote Originally Posted by jjjanos View Post
According to a former member of the CoA, when the CoA takes on a case the specifics items of the protest do not matter at all. To overturn the original findings of the court, there must be either a procedural error (as in this case through the failure to impose a penalty) or new evidence. If, however, in reviewing either the new or older evidence, the CoA notices a new violation not part of the initial SoM action, it is within their power to impose a penalty -- even on a driver who wasn't part of the original protest or the appeal!

i.e. Jack protests Jill over contact and SoMs find no foul. Jack appeals. In reviewing the evidence, the CoA notices that on the video, you can see Thumper drilling Bambi in the door, the CoA could penalize Thumper.
That used to be the case, but no longer. The COA is now explicitly forbidden to be a first court.

In your example, where new evidence implicates a third party, the COA would send the matter back to the original SOM, who would hear the case against him/her.

This preserves Thumper's right to a full hearing plus appeal.