I have been sitting on these comments for a nearly a week. Having sat through one of the highest profile securities cases in our Legal Systems history it is clear that the process is broken. The complexity of the topic exceeded the ability of the jurors to accurately deliberate. What lies in the balance is the ability of our system to properly administer justice. As I witnessed first hand that is not possible if the panel does not have the technical experience. The myth is if the facts are presented jurors can understand them and weigh them against the corresponding law. Really? Are you kidding me? I had a hard time following the case and forget applying the law…that added a dimension that put this into orbit complexity wise.
The founding fathers had it mostly right…having your peers settle disputes in open court would more often than not result in an unbiased resolution. But, they could never have fore-seen the complexities of today’s cases and need for experts to adjudicate (my word of the week) such complex issues as FAS123 vs APB25 etc.
The balance of a man’s life was held by people who on average do not even balance their checkbook on a monthly basis. How in Lord’s name could they be capable enough to render a decision in this case. They could render an opinion but not an informed decision. Then you add in the hubris of the Prosecution to win not administer justice and the dilemma begins. How can one receive a fair trial? You can’t. My advice stay out of court, away from the long arm of the Govt and move to Peru (JK). So what do we do now? I think its time for Legal reform. Change the process, incent the players to help find the truth not convict the accused. I know I’m dreaming their is to much money, ego and power in the current system for it to ever to be abandoned. Thought I would try.
Add A Comment