Random Take Offs

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Nice lawyers 4U

At about 4.30am yesterday, I decided I was going to call the commentary I was writing: "Crossing The Boundaries - The Mental Meanderings of a Self-Professed Hippie at a Criminal Trial". I am of the opinion that while the examination of witnesses may provide information, and glorify advocates in court, inaccuracy is an inevitable part of this process– either due to the way in which the statements have been obtained (intensive cross-examination, which serves to paint the picture the advocate wants the jury to see - whatever the cost may be), or malice on the part of the witnesses.

An academic argues that “Justice is not served if a witness is unable to communicate credibility to a jury. The search for truth is the ultimate and idealistic end of all litigated matter in a court trial”. To this, I have to say that justice is not served anyway. Since when did the search for truth start being 'idealistic'? Isn't that the whole purpose of the justice system? To put it simply, if people are getting put behind bars for something they have not done, simply because they managed to get hold of the right lawyers, justice will never be served.

I believe that in order for lawyers to stop being regarded as scum by members of society, more people need to go into the legal profession with something other than mega bucks and power trips as their focus. One of the ways to eliminate this cultivation of assholic behaviour, is to eliminate their glorification during cross-examination. Less drama, more focus on concrete evidence (such as that of the forensic variety - we live in an age where this is possible, after all).

And now, I'm going to sleep.


Post a Comment

<< Home