That's not necessarily a bad thing. We can pick people out of the phone book who could do a better job most of the time.
It doesn't work that way. Corrupt people caught trying to protect other corrupt people can only result in their being replaced by new corrupt people, maybe worse because the new people will be CHOSEN by the corrupt people to keep protecting them.
You can't fix a corrupt system anymore than you can save a rotten onion. The only solution is to throw all the players out, seize control, and rebuild the system from the ground up as a truly "for the people" system as the Founders intended, based on common sense and morality, not special interests padding the pockets of law makers.
90% of every law out there these days (including 90% of what government does) is patently ILLEGAL.
Our entire system of jurisprudence is based on 12th century ideas and thinking.
Think about it: You have three parties in every courtroom:
- A prosecutor who is only interested in your conviction, mostly to further his career! He is not looking for justice.
- A Defender who is only interested in getting you off, mostly to further his career! He is not looking for justice.
- Then there is the judge. He is only interested in PROCEDURE. He is not looking for justice neither.
The two lawyers are OFFICERS OF THE COURT, not you, though you're paying them.
All of these people are friends, know each other, maybe even have lunch together.
YOUR ability to get justice is proportional to how much money you can feed into the court.
Even if you are INNOCENT, you are still victimized by legal fees that can run into MILLIONS. The whole process is designed to make you need lawyers and to funnel money through the court system to FEED the court system.
The judge is more interested in legal procedure, not whether the evidence is relevant or purposeful in proving your innocence.
Justice or injustice, freed or guilty, all they care about is that procedure was followed, designed by THEM, for THEM. You only get off freed if they were satisfied that freeing you was more in their interest than convicting you.