For you legal people out there

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by creekster

I thought I explained, albeit perhaps not persuasively, in the rest of myh post. I take it you didn't like it?

You apprenetly assume a different result is an inequity. You also assume the only distinction between cases is a different judge. This is a faulty assumption, as each case is highly unique. When you use the term inequity do you mean in an absolute sense or in a legal sense within our system?

An absolute sense. I call how something may turn out being based on the luck of the draw as an inequity.

I am pretty darn sure a poor guy getting picked up on a DUI charge for instance stands a much better chance of getting convicted than a rich guy who can afford an expensive attorney.

Maybe that isn't an inequity in the legal system though because the rich guy should get a better legal outcome just like he should get a better house.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by creekster

I thought I explained, albeit perhaps not persuasively, in the rest of myh post. I take it you didn't like it?

You apprenetly assume a different result is an inequity. You also assume the only distinction between cases is a different judge. This is a faulty assumption, as each case is highly unique. When you use the term inequity do you mean in an absolute sense or in a legal sense within our system?

Neither one of you are admitting what you both believe to be true.

We have some lousy judges that carry over into the miscarriage aspect. There are variations of facts, and lots of reasons for differences, i.e., racial application, wealth of participants, but sometimes, we have underqualified judges.

We have a judge originally endorsed by our local paper, who was elected solely on the basis of her gender, who had NEVER practiced as a lawyer or litigant, yet she became a judge of general jurisdiction for criminal and civil cases. She is atrocious, perhaps not because she's inherently a bad person, just lacks the experience to be a good judge.

We have statistics that show our voters will vote for a fictitious female over a popular sitting male judge.

We have many lousy judges, but the bad ones unfairly taint the good ones.

[SeattleUte]

The important thing is that we have a system that tries to deliver justice. Russia can't attract enough investment capital in large part because people have no faith there is legal recourse if they get swindled. The system is what makes our civilization work.

[creekster]

Our system has never been about equality of result. It is about equality of opportunity and process. This is why, btw, that people associated with the system hate to see rights, especially procedural rights, impaired.

Bad judges? Sure. Bad lawyers? Yes. Lying witnesses? sure. All of this stuff is true. Perfection is not found on this earth. But our emphasisi on process makes our system at least as good and almost certainly better than any other approach out there.