Facts

Dismissal of appeals against convictions for assault and breach of the peace Parties and proceedings: Appellant 1 ([A.] ) and Appellant 2 ([B.] ) against the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Basel-Landschaft and the Respondent ([C.] ). Facts: On October 8, 2016, a confrontation occurred at the [E.] restaurant in [U.] between [C.] and a group that included [A.] , [B.] , and [D.] . The group charged at [C.] , with [B.] and [A.] leading the attack. [C.] suffered a mild traumatic brain injury and other injuries. The District Court of Basel-Landschaft partially acquitted [A.] and [B.] but convicted them of affray and assault. The Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft aggravated the sentences and convicted both of assault and breach of the peace. Appeals: [A.] and [B.] filed appeals against the judgment of the Cantonal Court, aiming to achieve their acquittals or to have the judgments overturned. The appellants 1 and 2 allege a violation of the presumption of innocence, arbitrariness, and an impermissible subsequent evaluation of anonymous witness statements by the lower court. They also object to the lower court's findings of fact regarding the convictions for assault. The Federal Supreme Court first examines the formal objections of the appellants. It finds that the objection of bias of the lower court is late and violates good faith. The objection of the inadmissibility of the first two interrogations of the respondent 2 is also inadmissible, as it is raised for the first time before the Federal Supreme Court and violates good faith. With regard to the subsequent evaluation of the anonymous witness statements, the Federal Supreme Court finds that the lower court already addressed the statements of the anonymous witnesses in the appeal proceedings and thus did not conduct a subsequent evaluation. The lower court thoroughly examined the statements of the anonymous witnesses for exculpatory elements and found none. The appellants' criticism of the subsequent evaluation is therefore unfounded. Finally, the Federal Supreme Court examines the lower court's findings of fact regarding the convictions for assault. It finds that the lower court extensively evaluated the statements of the various persons interviewed and concluded that the appellants 1 and 2 had violently participated in the attack on the respondent 2. The lower court did not consider the statements of the anonymous witnesses A.A. and Mr. [H.] as exculpatory, as they did not perceive the first blow. The appellants' criticism of the findings of fact is therefore unfounded. ATF 123 IV 45, ATF 124 III 67, BGE 148 IV 137, BGE 144 I 234, BGE 143 IV 69, BGE 149 I 14, BGE 148 IV 356, BGE 147 I 73, BGE 145 V 304, BGE 143 V 66, BGE 135 III 334, BGE 127 I 196, BGE 116 Ia 14, BGE 121 I 225, BGE 143 IV 380, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 144 IV 345, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 150 IV 389, BGE 150 I 50, BGE 148 V 366, BGE 137 II 353, BGE 127 I 38, BGE 141 I 49, BGE 141 I 70, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148 IV 409, BGE 146 IV 88, BGE 145 IV 154, BGE 148…