RPGWW

Many apologies to those of you who are about to read this and have never done anything that this complains about. I'm sorry.

Mmkay, this is something that really bugs me, and the fact that I run into it all of the time doesn't seem to help, much.

Some of you may know that I am of a semi-legal bent.

Anyway, I noticed that lots of people enjoy talking about how awful the American justice system is. How terrible lawyers are, because all they do is distort the facts and attempt to bend the law as much as possible... so long as they get paid. How silly cases go to court all of the time and people get these heinous awards for outrageous claims.

Well, I'm sick of it. That's an incredibly biased, media-fed, ignorant way of looking at things.

The American justice system isn't terrible. Believe it or not, it works. It works an alarming amount of the time. Why do you never hear of success stories? Because success stories are boring. They aren't sensational, so no news media picks it up. Why do rich people seem to get off of crimes more often than they look like they ought to? Don't blame the justice system, blame the jury and the clause of "reasonable doubt" and thank your diety it isn't "absolute doubt," "sure doubt," or even "provable doubt." Something about sensationalism combined with star power makes the people who are drawn for juries (and most of the population) dumb-struck. Do you think Winona Ryder should have gone to jail? I do. And it isn't the justice system's fault that she didn't, since the system tries to be as fair as possible. Do you think it's unfair that Roman Pulanski has to stay out of the country because the mean old American laws say he's a criminal? Well, he had sex with a twelve-year-old girl.

Lawyers aren't terrible. They are one of the greatest blessings that you can hope to have in a society that has laws to protect its constituents from everything. Yet still there is the malice and the venom.
AM recently said he disliked the profession of Attorney because they might have argued points that they didn't agree with because it is their job to defend their client and to win. Yes, that isn't nice. That's also something like .5% of all attorneys, everywhere. Only 10% of all Attorneys actually do anything in trials, and about 2% of those are at criminal proceedings. The others? Doing research into the law to help protect society from society's predators. Without lawyers, there would be no laws to protect people from corporate negligence, or allow for suing on physical damages, or being able to get damages from a factory for negligence. So stop giving them such a bad rap. They already deal with the worst aspects of humanity as it is on a regular basis. They don't need the undeserved venom of the population just because the population doesn't understand what it is lawyers do.

Silly cases go to court all the time, yes, so long as you have a broad enough interpretation of "silly." That woman who sued MacDonald's for the hot coffee? She (and other people) had previously complained about the heat of the beverage, and when it was spilled on her it gave her second and third degree burns on her crotch. Yet it's absurd for her to have the temerity to go to court and try to sue for damages because being burned by coffee is silly. Oh, what an awful system we have, to humor such a leech because of silly little third-degree burns.

Yes, the system isn't perfect. There could probably be some improvement made. However, ranting about how something could stand to be fixed and yet not having even the vaguest idea how to fix it doesn't help.

So, next time you feel a need to vent your erudition on the subject of the law,( since laypeople are obviously much more in tune and much more educated on the subject of law than lawyers), stop and think before you speak. If you HAVE to express your outrage, could you just do it in a place where I won't see it? <p>[---------------------------]
"There is great disorder under Heaven, and the situation is excellent."
-Mao Tse-Tung

"I eat the talking bees because I am George Washington Christ"
-From "Bob the Ball"</p>

I'm interested in seeing the source of those percentages, or if there is not one, data to back it up.

<p>---------------------------

Your are not supposed to be reading this!</p>

Insightful, friend Nev. But it begs the question: How would YOU improve the law? <p>--------------------
Who needs lensflares?</p>

Also: For fun!

Can you give us a comparison of the US and Canadian legal systems? <p>---------------------------

Your are not supposed to be reading this!</p>

...Wait, someone here's been defending Roman Pulanski? <p>

---

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

Someone has to. <p>--------------------
Who needs lensflares?</p>

Meh. I'm a debater. I kind of have to like lawyers, or else spit at myself in the mirror every morning in disdain. <p>-------------------------
Wise man say, "forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."

"It's like that old Scandinavian saying. You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk real fast or you'll DIE."
--Rose:The Golden Girls</p>

Quote:

---

Don't blame the justice system, blame the jury and the clause of "reasonable doubt"

---

Isn't that, you know, the ESSENCE of the American justice system?

Also, what the fuck is with the adversary model? It takes the focus away from actually figuring out what happens in criminal cases and puts the emphasis on beating the other guy. Politics, politics, politics.

You can never convince me that any sort of officialized debate has ever been 'clean' since people have started to demonize the ENTIRETY of their opponents' claims because they happened to quote one sentence fron Nietsche. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

The percentages, for the most part, come from my teachers and my textbooks- Every lawyer I've ever asked or who's ever deigned to tell me has told me those figures, and it makes sense since civil trials outnumber criminal trials by 4 to 1. Not cases, not proceedings, not hearings, trials. 2 of those 4 don't have juries to begin with since a jury couldn't be expected to make an educated decision about innocence or guilt and/or they happen on the grounds of some dispute of law on the appellate levels.

I wouldn't improve improve on the American justice system because I don't know how. I guess, in THEORY, a better justice system would be part of a Deiocracy, where G-d is the center of the government and is capable, able, and willing to make all decisions about everything. If there was a contest as to the truth, you'd have a chat with G-d, who would be immediately and readily accessible, and G-d would tell you what happened and what should be done about it. Another way you could do it is by torturing suspects until they tell you what you want to know, thus rendering cross-examination unneccesary. You could do away with Habeas Corpus, thus making it unneccesary for a person to be present at their own trial, and do away with the Defense to make the entire process go more smoothly and more easily. Or you could let ALL justice stay with the police force, and they execute all justice without any relation to their own judgement. All of these would be MUCH more efficient and MUCH less controversial, but aside from the Deiocracy, I don't think any of these would be fair.

Yes, Priam, that is the essence of decision-making in a trial. I'm being sarcastic.

I don't know anything about the Canadian justice system except that it probably has a lot to do with the British justice system, which is the same system from which the American justice system is derived. <p>[---------------------------]
"There is great disorder under Heaven, and the situation is excellent."
-Mao Tse-Tung

"I eat the talking bees because I am George Washington Christ"
-From "Bob the Ball"</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thegreatnevareh>The] at: 2/5/05 22:27

My problems with our justice system are pretty much Priam's problems with our justice system. I will admit that it does it's job most of the time. The problem is that people are a dispicable lot who, when presented with a system of any type, will immediately scramble to find any and all possible ways to break it. While our justice system has done great things, it is also easily bent by malicious indivuduals to do horrible things to innocent people. I'm not sure how much of this can be blamed on the system itself, becuase no matter what it was, people would find a way around it... but it does lend itself to inaccuracy and unfairness in a couple key places.

Of course, for all my complaining, I'm really not sure what I would suggest to make it much better. <p><div style="text-align:center"></div></p>

I would make people suck less. *sage nod* <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

Hey Nev! I have a question!

You've put together a nice case basically telling people that Lawyers/the law is not the enemy, and it was fairly intelligent and mature. It even used some examples and support here and there, which is keen!

So why when our Chuck asked you a question, mautre/intelligent or not, did you react with biting petty sarcasm and general dumbassery? Not even kidding. I'd like to know how you expected to be take seriously after that little rant.

Edit: Editted because Chuck is not Chunk or some other poorly typed derivation!

Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=jasonab17>JasonAB17</A]&nbsp; at: 2/6/05 18:27

I'm pretty sure he was making the point that, with the current system, none of those things can happen, and that's a good thing, thus your system isn't as shitty as people make it out to be, sometimes.

What he's saying (and this is my interpretation, so he's free to correct me) is that you should be damned glad that you have your current system. It means that if you get put on trial, you get treated fairly, and if you're innocent, there's a good chance you'll be proven such.

I guess, in THEORY, a better justice system would be part of a Deiocracy, where G-d is the center of the government and is capable, able, and willing to make all decisions about everything. If there was a contest as to the truth, you'd have a chat with G-d, who would be immediately and readily accessible, and G-d would tell you what happened and what should be done about it.

Obviously, this would be the ideal. But since God is fictional (once again, opinion, and even if it turns out that <religion X> is correct, God is not currently solving all our problems), it clearly can't work.

Another way you could do it is by torturing suspects until they tell you what you want to know, thus rendering cross-examination unneccesary. You could do away with Habeas Corpus, thus making it unneccesary for a person to be present at their own trial, and do away with the Defense to make the entire process go more smoothly and more easily.

Here, Nev is making the point that such systems used to be fairly common, and in some places I imagine they are still similar, so be thankful that we have those things.

Or you could let ALL justice stay with the police force, and they execute all justice without any relation to their own judgement.

In prewar Japan, the police carried full length shinais, and could essentially detain you for any reason they deemed fit, then either a) lock you up, or b) beat the shit out of you with the aforementioned bamboo poles. Your justice system prevents that, so be thankful.

I maintain that systems are always better before you introduce humans into the equation. A better justice system wouldn't be difficult except that people form first impressions and stick with them, and play favorites, and ignore things selectively, and forget shit, and other instances of dumbassery.

It might be a good idea to require anyone serving Jury duty to complete a college-level course in debate. Or, possibly, some sort of equivalent so that the twisting-turning rhetoric of the two sides does not confuse the weak human mind.

"Human:" the Catch-All Insultâ„¢ <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

Erm... Bes? I DID answer it seriously. A Deiocracy would be the most ideal form of government possible because it would be run by the most ideal being possible. Just because it isn't religiously palatable and it appears childish doesn't mean it isn't a serious answer.

Also, thanks, EDK. <p>[---------------------------]
"There is great disorder under Heaven, and the situation is excellent."
-Mao Tse-Tung

"I eat the talking bees because I am George Washington Christ"
-From "Bob the Ball"</p>

Quote:

---

It might be a good idea to require anyone serving Jury duty to complete a college-level course in debate. Or, possibly, some sort of equivalent so that the twisting-turning rhetoric of the two sides does not confuse the weak human mind.

---

I like this. I like this a lot.
<p>-------------------------
Wise man say, "forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."

"It's like that old Scandinavian saying. You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk real fast or you'll DIE."
--Rose:The Golden Girls</p>

[obligatory tongue-in-cheek commenty about education requirements and how such discretion might have effected our last two presidential elections] <p><div style="text-align:center"></div></p>

[obligatory chilling reminder of the history of education requirements in American voting] <p>

---

In the beginning was the word...</p>

I maintain my previous point about Humans and Fucking Things Up. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>