Howdy folks! Today’s entry will be highly entertaining, unless you are one of my harder-to-please audience, which, well, are hard to please. I think you know who you are. I would like to request that instead of you telling me that you don’t like my entry, you go start your own site and see how interesting of an article you can write. Once you do that, you will have some room to talk. Until then, I will continue to scoff at your rude remarks, content in the knowledge that my site may suck, but it’s 100% more entertaining than yours.
Disclaimer: This article in no way reflects my views of certain people (my boss) when I make derogatory remarks about people that are picked for jury duty. I do not think that my boss is a stupid moron, just because he got picked for jury duty the very day I wrote this article. I swear, it’s just a coincidence.
I would like to discuss the finer points of our American legal system. Ok, actually, I’m going to talk about the not-so-fine points. To start, I think that having an adversarial system is brilliant, and also crazy.
Here’s the problem: We have two sides, both of which have secrets, neither of which can share the information with each other. So, by it’s very nature, all trials are decided using faulty and/or incomplete information. The defense lawyer that gets a criminal off is celebrated as brilliant. I think that’s a buncho crap. If the person is guilty and confesses it to a lawyer, they should be forced to say so, and the person should go to jail. This “privilege” crap doesn’t make any sense. If the person DID the crime… they should be punished.
And the worst part of the legal system is “supressing of evidence.” Ok, we KNOW that this evidence implicates someone, and chances are, it makes the case against someone that is GUILTY. I realize that rules about illegal searches are designed to protect from the state being big brother, but if evidence exists, it should be in the trial. Otherwise, the case is being decided on incomplete facts. I propose that instead of throwing out the evidence, that we punish the officer that illegally obtained the evidence, rather than punishing society by putting a criminal back on the streets.
Then, once we actually get to the trial, assuming there’s enough evidence left after the judge rules that the murder weapon and the surveillance video that caught the whole thing on tape are supressed because there was a loophole with the search warrant, you end up in front of a jury of morons. I’m not saying that all people that get summoned are morons. I’m saying that the people that are TOO DUMB to get out of actually serving are morons. Come on… anyone with half a brain can get out of jury duty. So we end up with a jury of “people that don’t want to be at work, or don’t have a job so they want the 8 bucks a day” instead of a jury of peers.
Frankly, I don’t want my fate being decided by a jury of people that were too dumb to get out of jury duty. God help us.
And let us not forget the “Insanity” or “Not comIncredipetent” defense. If someone commits a crime, obviously they’re crazy. Being a nut is not a defense. It may be a reason, but it’s not a defense. A defense is “yes, I killed him, but he was in the process of killing my family with a pitchfork.” Saying “I did it because the voices told me to” is not a defense, because ANYONE can say that. All you have to do is fool a shrink, which frankly can’t be that hard, and you’ve committed the perfect crime.
And last but not least, we have judges. The “almighty” frickin idiots that preside over these trials are some of the most corrupt, moronic people in society. They were people that had the morals of a defense attorney, and the political ability of a congressman. Talk about the sleeze of the earth.
Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t offer an alternative to the current system, so here it is:
1. If a person confesses to a crime, even if they’re NUTSO, or were tortured by the LAPD, they are guilty and go to jail.
2. If the person was beaten by police, the police will be punished.
3. If evidence is found illegally, it will be allowed in, but the officer that was too dumb to get a warrant will also go to jail.
4. There will be no more jury or judge involved in the case. The attorneys will present their cases in a half hour format to a live studio audience, and then the audience will vote, guilty or not guilty. I know this will work because on Millionaire, the audience poll is NEVER wrong. The majority of Americans will always have the right answer, via a very interesting “floating statistical mean” that occurs in situations like this.
5. Persons found guilty will never get parole. Ever.
6. Frankly, I still think we should execute anyone found guilty of a crime, no matter what it is. Much cheaper than the current system.