Regarding our system of justice in this (our) country, I have…
Three Questions:
- Are there too many lawbreakers?
- Are there too many laws?
- Is there too much room for interpretation?
Regarding lawbreakers:
- Depending on one's place, there is a gamut from those who break the law yet suffer not, to those accused who suffer the harshest of interpretations.
- Many of those who suffer are guilty upon accusation with little to no opportunity to establish innocence. That said, justice must still account for the innocent victim.
- I believe the state is complicit in the flaws in our system, thus not innocent. I believe the same could be said for any organization (large or small) operating wholly or partially for any or all of the purposes of politics (power), profit (capitalism / wealth), or zealotry (extreme devotion to a set of beliefs or a cause).
Regarding laws and their interpretation:
- Yes and Yes. The more laws, the broader the potential interpretation. This bears out in my recent experience as a new paralegal in a law office where I consistently see multiple charges come in from law enforcement, fewer charges being filed by the prosecuting attorney, and then fewer charges yet eventually resulting in a guilty plea. It seems we (when possible) overwhelm the defendant then play good cop by offering to dismiss some of the charges in return for a guilty plea on just one or two of them. In fairness I believe the defendant is most likely guilty of those charges (or something in the neighborhood), but the system (with so many laws and such broad interpretations) is built to essentially make them feel they have no choice. And if they broke a law (especially one with an innocent victim) perhaps the system works; but I also believe it works FOR some and AGAINST others - depending on one’s place. The bureaucracy aids in consistency and a certain amount of fairness within one’s stratum but it remains a system in which the privileged are given benefit of any doubt and the insignificant remain insignificant.
