how can america claim to be fair and just when rich ppl get immensly better lawyers?

[Gatekeeper]

I think I would call it a Legal System since it is NOT "JUST"(Justice) to all that are summoned into it. The term "Justice System" is a joke.

No Fucking Shit!

This is one of the reasons for coming back everyday, is to view some of these intelligent and insightful replies. Yes, the system of law in the USA is 'NFS' obvious as you say, but it is only a comment. Thank you.

 

[Big Fitz]

Just cause Gate reminded me of this.

Around the turn of the last century, progressive legal scholars fought tooth and nail to get morality and ethics divorced from law. They succeeded and the progressives thought his a grand thing. Now we discover they did not want to keep ethics and morality separated from law. They just wanted to replace what was legally protected as good and moral with what they believed.

a century later... what a surprise. Changing the rules again to benefit themselves.

This is why progressives are correctly labeled immoral and unethical. They continually change the rules to maintain an unfair advantage.

 

[boedicca]

So at who's expense would the better lawyers be provided.

It isn't really about better lawyers. It's about better judges and a better judicial system - one that doesn't allow the quality of a lawyer to influence the outcome. It's about justice being the final result.

Lawyers usually do the best for their clients - guity or not, while grossly overcharging for their services.

The fact is, if a lawyer is more capable or less capable, or if he/she is better politically positioned, it influences the out come greatly.

Judges shouldn't allow it - but they do.

Judges are provided paperwork regarding a case prior to it coming to court. Instead of the "Name Dropping Defense Theory", there's an alternate one: the judge had already reviewed the paperwork, come to the conclusion that you were acting in self-defense, and decided not to waste court time. Was the other guy's case handled after or before yours? That might also have had an impact.

 

[boedicca]

Do you all really think that the outcome of the O.J. Simpson trial would have been the same if he had a public defender?

The OJ trial was due to the venue. A very different outcome would have occurred if it had been held in Brentwood.

 

[boedicca]

No one has a right to equality of outcome. They do have the right to being treated equal under the law. If they want a good lawyer, they must find a way to pay for it. To make sure that everyone ends up with the same is to make laws preferential to some, and unfair to others. This does nothing but breed resentment from those who are discriminated against by the law towards that those who undeservedly benefit.

(snip)

You need to take your hands out of other people's pockets, realize you have no right to give anything except what you own, quit whining about the behavior of others and live your own life instead of meddling in the lives of others. If you can't do this... someone needs to stop you. Permanently if necessary to save the rest of the world from your rationalized evil.

The costs to society of forcing an equal outcome on everyone are far worse than the natural inequalities that arise in a free one.

 

[Big Fitz]

It can't be done forever. And when it fails, everyone gets hurt. Particularly those in the most need.

Historical example? The French Revolution. Fucking collective human rights and social 'justice'.

Individual rights and Equal justice is the only defense anyone has from tyranny of others.

 

[jillian]

Do you all really think that the outcome of the O.J. Simpson trial would have been the same if he had a public defender?

The OJ trial was due to the venue. A very different outcome would have occurred if it had been held in Brentwood.

the OJ result was because the prosecutors put on an embarrassingly bad case. marcia was too busy worrying about how her hair looked and darden was too busy worrying about marcia.

 

[Madeline]

shouldn't all people get a level playing field when in court? how can you claim the justice system is even worth upholding when rich people get better lawyers with connections to judges and DAs and then get let free or minimal punishment, while a poor person doing the same thing would spend years or their entire life in jail?

considering everything else is in the justice process is run by the government, except for jails which just hold already processed people, why can't trial lawyers work for hte government and each person be assigned a lawyer from a random pool?

It is error to assume that a $400 an hour lawyer can beat up anyone who only makes $25,000 a year. Most PDs are fantabulous lawyers who accept low pay because they are idealistic. Some are shiney new lawyers out to make their bones. Others are graybeards at the end of prestigious careers who have the luxury of not needing a high salary, so they do work they love.

Poor people are harder to represent than rich people for various reasons, none of them having to do with the quality of their lawyers. First, there are simply too many people, 99% of them poor, in the system. Only 1% of cases go to trial -- the rest are plea bargained out. The plea bargaining system has it faults, but which of us is willing to shoulder the costs for a justice system expanded by a factor of 100? (1000?)

Poor people are also less attractive to juries, who normally are not drawn from poverty themselves. The mail carrier, housewife or sales clerk has no life experience that would allow him or her to process the self defense tactics employed by street whores.

One change I would like to have considered is the use of public funds to pay for expert witnesses and the like for poor people. Ever watch the trial of a famous or wealthy person? There's a parade of independent coroners, power point presentations, etc. In most jurisdictions, a PD has to petition the judge for funds to pay even one expert, and that motion is very often denied.

Our system of justice is terrible, and needs an overhaul. But it is still the finest system on Earth.

 

[newpolitics]

shouldn't all people get a level playing field when in court?

Everyone DOES have a level playing field when coming into court.

how can you claim the justice system is even worth upholding when rich people get better lawyers with connections to judges and DAs and then get let free or minimal punishment,

You forgot dirty politicians. And what makes you think that "rich" people have such connections? The movies? Ill grant you some do like the kenedys but that is not the norm.

while a poor person doing the same thing would spend years or their entire life in jail?

I dont know about that, I see an awful lot of "poor" criminals walking around on the street, laughing at the system because they got off with a public defender.

considering everything else is in the justice process is run by the government, except for jails which just hold already processed people, why can't trial lawyers work for hte government and each person be assigned a lawyer from a random pool?

They are. They are called public defenders. Its all about presenting a better case. It has nothing to do with money. It has everything to do with brains.

For someone so beautiful, you sure are stupid.

 

[newpolitics]

So work harder, get a better education, a better paying job, and pay for a better lawyer.
What's holding you back?

Oh shut, the fuck, up. What do you do that is so godamn amazing? Not EVERYONE can be rich. There is only so much wealth, resources, to go around. Someone has to be on the bottom rung, otherwise, what you are implying is socialism. The distribution of wealth is what is important- that the rich aren't extremely rich with only a few holding all of the wealth, and the rest of the resources spread thinly among the everyone else. Who is going to take out your trash everyday if everybody owns their own business. Get a grip. Don't blame people. The system has to offer fair representation for everyone. It just so happens that minorities are less wealthy, because of longstanding institutional racism, and makes it harder for them, both for psychological (ingrained societal beliefs) and sociological reasons, to move upward socially and economically. White cons loves to ignore this and point and blame people. If you were black and grew up in the ninth ward New Orleans, I guarantee you'd think a whole lot differently... put yourself in someone elses shoes for once, and let go of your own inflated ego... Oh yeah, all neo-cons should be locked up and barred from voting... I realize how un-american that is. That was said out of pure anger and cons own imposition of their will on the rest of us as being 'the true and only way' to do things, without ever wanting to cross the aisle or work together. I've never seen such immaturity in an arena so serious in my life.

Here's a good site to visit for all of you cons:

FUCK YOU REPUBLICANS!!!

hey! libturd. how much of Oprah's billion dollars should she spread around and re-distribute.. damn at some point you've made enough darn money hey?

What? Did that make any sense? Where, in what I said, did I imply taking Oprah's money or re-distributing wealth? Where do you pull this shit from? Your ass? You need to stop watching Glenn Beck and Hannity. They are poison, and should be tortured for their crime of spreading ignorance and hate.

 

[Big Fitz]

Do you all really think that the outcome of the O.J. Simpson trial would have been the same if he had a public defender?

The OJ trial was due to the venue. A very different outcome would have occurred if it had been held in Brentwood.

the OJ result was because the prosecutors put on an embarrassingly bad case. marcia was too busy worrying about how her hair looked and darden was too busy worrying about marcia.

In this we agree. I did everything in my power not to see anything about the case and still knew the prosecution fucked up worse than pretty much anyone ever had in a major prosecution before. They should have been fired with how bad they performed. I don't know what the impact of this case was on their lives, but it should have been deservedly bad professionally.

 

[Madeline]

The OJ trial was due to the venue. A very different outcome would have occurred if it had been held in Brentwood.

the OJ result was because the prosecutors put on an embarrassingly bad case. marcia was too busy worrying about how her hair looked and darden was too busy worrying about marcia.

In this we agree. I did everything in my power not to see anything about the case and still knew the prosecution fucked up worse than pretty much anyone ever had in a major prosecution before. They should have been fired with how bad they performed. I don't know what the impact of this case was on their lives, but it should have been deservedly bad professionally.

It is so popular to blame the ADA when an acquittal comes through and is unpopular. I don't happen to share this POV. I think Marcia Clark did a superb job but Mark Furman, her chief investigative witness, lied to her in pre-trial prep. What an asshole...Furman gave an interview to a journalist ABOUT the murders BEFORE he testified and did not tell Clark he had done so. Then he used the "N" word during the interview, but acted shocked that he'd be impeached on the witness stand after he LIED and denied every saying the "N" word? If Furman had been my witness I'd had beaten him half to death on cross, but even so, Marcia Clark could not redeem him to the jury, and when they distrusted the investigation it was all over but the crying.

These days, Furman runs around like a Champion Of Justice and Marcia Clark is disgraced? I think that's completely unfair.

You can blame the judge, or the defense team, etc. But the bottom line is we all suspect the same damned thing: The jury knew OJ was guilty and nullified because they hated Furman.

 

[Avatar4321]

What? Did that make any sense? Where, in what I said, did I imply taking Oprah's money or re-distributing wealth? Where do you pull this shit from? Your ass? You need to stop watching Glenn Beck and Hannity. They are poison, and should be tortured for their crime of spreading ignorance and hate.

I am always amused by posts who want to torture people for spreading ignorance and hate. It's just so ironic. Of course, it's also really sad.