Backbaygrouch’s comment on “No Finger Pointing” deserves to be our article for today:
America has a unique legal doctrine, sometimes called purity of the temple. If the police or the prosecutor violate laws in gathering evidence, the criminal walks. Everywhere else the evidence is allowed and the officials are punished for their acts. In America the public is punished by allowing criminals to walk while the officials seldom face any censure.
The reasoning given is that the inability of the officials to prosecute will discourage wrongful actions. This reasoning escapes the rest of the world where punishment is seen as a greater prod towards adherence to correct methods than immunity for public payroll malefactors. They see no reason to let a criminal walk whenever evidence, rightfully or wrongfully gathered, proves guilt.
In brief in the United States the court system is operated for the benefit of those who run it rather than the public in a way no other nation tolerates, at least in theory. This is illustrative of Bob’s argument. It is so ingrained that most Americans do not even notice it or ever question the manifest stupidity of the situation.
#1 by shari on 01/10/2010 - 11:41 am
I copied and sent this one. It reveals so well, how nice, anti-hate,anti death penalty, and yes, anti-white are interconnected. The criminals who walk, are not jaywalkers or petty shoplifters. They are killers,rapists and child molesters. You can’t say, as some do,that there is no need for a death penalty because we now have such stronger, better prisons. That is just perverting the whole notion of a justice system and turning it into a bureaucracy. I think that was the purpose of the exclusionary rule in the first place.
#2 by Dave on 01/10/2010 - 12:51 pm
Go to your local county courthouse. Get a load of how tyranny operates in the here and now.
After you are humiliated by being searched and scanned at the door, try to find an actual residential address for your judge, and consider the reason these dogs feel the need to hide from the public and subject the public to personal search humiliations for fear of assassination.
Go down to Clerk’s cashier window. See the long line of patiently waiting “offenders” forking over money (under a misdemeanor ticket book stretching from the earth to the moon) under threat of imprisonment for the benefit of the judicial thieves and their uniformed public employee union henchmen.
Get called for jury duty and watch a $500 per day prosecutor (fully benefited and overhead loaded cost) and $800 per day judge (fully benefited and overhead loaded cost) subject you to humiliating interrogatories and demand that you serve under threat of “misdemeanor” for $30 wages per day as your “civic duty”
Watch the Sheriff’s van pull out the jail house parking lot jammed full of assorted restraining order violators, DUI alcoholics, pot-heads, and delinquent in child support derelicts, at the cost of over $1,000 per hour (overhead loaded actual cost) to muck out the toilets at Fire Department Administrative headquarters to fulfill “community service” sentence mandates and con the public into believing “the prisoners are being made to work”.
Go spend the day in District Court and get a load of real life street theater. It is an experience akin to bathing in a septic tank and it will let you know how impossible it is that a District Court judge (bottom rung wordsmith on society’s sickening latter of judicial shame) could possibly be sane and endure “the parade” day after day.
Take a good look at the “public defenders” to see what the rock bottom rung of a profession that is built on a pyramid of status really looks like. They are the saddest sacks of an army of sad sack professional losers trying to earn a living in a system where who you know, where you went to school, and where you first worked mean everything.
“Public defenders” are like downs syndrome kids. The status game was never even available to them. They are “out of the womb” pathetic.
Take a good look at the judge (it doesn’t matter if it is Superior Court of even one of the appellate courts or administrative tribunals) THEY ARE ALL PROFESSIONAL LOSERS AND KNOW IT.
And you can’t even find a Nazi with a chrome helmet in there. A Nazi with the chrome helmet is at least under some delusion of hope. This is more like one of the halls of hell where the damned walk imprisoned and without hope. It’s one of those “I’m better off dead but don’t have the guts to kill myself” situations, professionally speaking.
That’s the judicial system.
I hate judges but I pity them far more. As for the lawyers trapped in this system, my heart bleeds, my heart truly bleeds.
As for the derelicts that are partly the SUBJECT of the system, well, they’re derelicts, what can you do?
#3 by Dave on 01/10/2010 - 2:04 pm
Being human, very few judges are above your old time Ozark’s hillbillies.
You are not going to succeed with them if you are addressing something they know.
That is why I wish I had a nickel for every dumb lawyer and every dumber client (after all the client pays). I would be rich indeed and all it would take is a nickel each.
Computers are making it more difficult to play the “specialize in something the judge or arbitrator doesn’t know” game, but the truly smart lawyers play this game nonetheless.
Some of “the law” is poorly indexed, its “ontology” admitting taxonomies that no one has ever made any attempt to index (it would be too embarrassing to try) and “uniform law acts” only make matters worse. But it is a panacea for smart lawyers (the very few that exist).
They become masters on some obscure legal “ontology” that nevertheless has great business value, like order of claims in trade finance or in counterparty rights in OTC derivatives, etc.
These lawyers then get to flatter the judge or arbitrator by “instructing them” in something that enhances the judge or arbitrators’ prestige and professional prospects and also by doing the judge’s or arbitrator’s job for them.
I love these kinds of lawyers.
They are the top tier of the oriental art and absurdity that Robert Whitaker has so thoroughly critiqued in his criticism of institutional systems of Wordism and particularly that system of Wordism known as “the courts”.
These systems are so easy to play by anybody possessed of real brains!
The fools are the ones that take it seriously.
Let me say it again: The fools are the ones that take it seriously.
And if you think it is serious, you don’t understand it.
#4 by shari on 01/10/2010 - 2:27 pm
The damage and evil that they do is serious,very serious. I know that much. I think that those with real brains, who only use them for deceit and cleverness, are much worse than the derelicts in the dock.
#5 by Dave on 01/10/2010 - 11:06 pm
Shari,
The business law and conflict resolution side of the courts that is mostly resolved through various forms of arbitration actually work fairly well.
World-wide, business uses either the law of London or New York to resolve business disputes and business usually prefers arbitrators because you can’t get a predictable or rational result out of a jury. Judges love handing cases to arbitrators because the dockets are always too full.
The players are not evil, but often overcompensated.
But it is still an oriental game that the “statesmen” and “diplomats” win.
The losers are the parties that didn’t do enough thinking up front and you’d be surprised at how often even the global blue chips mess up because they failed to dot their i’s and cross their t’s before they got into a dispute.
But the civil rights side, the labor law side, the anti-trust side, the securities regulation side, the banking and currency regulation side, the capital controls and investment industry regulation side, the criminal law side, and the tax law side of the courts, justice is nowhere to be found. Only the dictatorship of men (and a few woman) in black dresses. AND IT IS DICTATORSHIP. The real Constitution is meaningless. No elected official dares make substantive criticisms of a judge or call for investigations and inquiries. Ideological crticisms, yes. Substantive criticism or concerns involving the judge’s actual conduct on specific cases, no. They functon largely without outside oversight and checks on their conduct, just like checks in the MSM and most of academia are non-existent.
It is different on the ordinary business disputes side. People have a lot of choices when it comes to choosing venues to resolve ordinary business disputes. If they don’t like the service, they can go elsewhere.
That is why the business dispute side works, but it is far too expensive.
#6 by shari on 01/11/2010 - 3:13 pm
Dave, There is an example of a dictator judge by Rob Sanchez of vdare. Hizzoner orders three websites shut down and all commenters exposed because he doesn’t like what a blogger called Tunnelrat is saying about the H1-B. But I’m sure you already know of all kinds of examples already. Thanks for expanding.