Torino, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria  E.I.1,  fol. 4r Justinian's Digest 1.1

‘simpliciter et de plano, ac sine advocatorum strepitu et figura iudicii’ Sarah Rubin Blanshei, Politics and Justice in Late Medieval Bologna (Medieval Law and Its Practice; Leiden-Boston 2010)408 writes that in Bolognese courts ‘The grant of authority to the podestà and his judges usually specified they were to prosecute the trial “simply and plainly, without clamor and the normal forms of procedure”, that is with the suspension of due process — by summary justice’. Thomas A. Fudge, The Trial of John Hus: Medieval Heresy and Criminal Procedure (Oxford 2013) 91-96, misinterprets a number of papal decretals that deal with summary criminal procedure; the two most glaring examples are Boniface VIII’s ‘Statuta’, VI 5.2.20, p. 93 and Innocent III’s ‘Veniens’, X 5.1.15, p. 94.  Fudge states that Boniface dictated that advocates could be barred from the courtroom (advocatorum strepitu) and that Innocent forbade advocates in criminal cases.