<P> The proceeding in the inquisitorial system is essentially by writing . Most of the witnesses would have given evidence in the investigation phase and such evidence will be contained in the dossier under the form of police reports . In the same way, the accused would have already put his or her case at the investigation phase but he or she will be free to change her or his evidence at trial . Whether the accused pleads guilty or not, a trial will be conducted . Unlike the adversarial system, the conviction and sentence to be served (if any) will be released by the trial jury together with the president of the trial bench, following their common deliberation . </P> <P> There are many exceptions in both directions . For example, most proceedings before U.S. federal and state agencies are inquisitorial in nature, at least the initial stages (e.g., a patent examiner, a social security hearing officer, and so on), even though the law to be applied is developed through common law processes . </P> <P> The contrast between civil law and common law legal systems has become increasingly blurred, with the growing importance of jurisprudence (similar to case law but not binding) in civil law countries, and the growing importance of statute law and codes in common law countries . </P> <P> Examples of common law being replaced by statute or codified rule in the United States include criminal law (since 1812, U.S. federal courts and most but not all of the States have held that criminal law must be embodied in statute if the public is to have fair notice), commercial law (the Uniform Commercial Code in the early 1960s) and procedure (the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the 1930s and the Federal Rules of Evidence in the 1970s). But note that in each case, the statute sets the general principles, but the interstitial common law process determines the scope and application of the statute . </P>

Who gave us the common principles of law and what are they