Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704134 16-Jan-2017 14:22
Send private message

Hammerer:

 

I really dislike the following:

 

  • people using technicalities to avoid or escape or subvert or obscure the intent of the law. This isn't limited to lawyers but it is a significant part of what lawyers do.
  • that legal systems in general and our own New Zealand legal system are so often diverted from producing just and positive outcomes. Adversarial systems so often produce win-lose outcomes when more positive outcomes are available such as win-win. I've sat through an entire seven-week fraud trial with four defendants which cost millions to produce an outcome that did not return any of the many millions of stolen money. I'm quite sure that other approaches would have produced the same result without the extensive costs.
  • that the outcomes from our legal system are often a lot like a lottery.   About the only rule that I am aware of is that those with the biggest pockets win far more than they should. This primarily relates to civil proceedings but it is often true for criminal proceedings as well.

 

 

 

There are a number of "schools of thought" that can be applied to the law.  For example, the Black-letter Law, the Natural Law, the Spirit of the Law, etc... Each of these takes into consideration that there is an "ideal" law which should be used as a baseline for establishing "behaviours".  In the US, the criminal aspect of this is referred to as the Model Penal Code.  It's distributed across the whole of the nation but, it's also subject to interpretation.  In the "Black Letter" instance, a woman who steals bread to feed her children is guilty of theft, irrespective of circumstances.  Under this assumption, what is written shall be done.  In the Spirit of the Law, the theft is viewed under extenuating circumstances and guilt/innocence is weighed accordingly.  If a judge cannot skirt a mandatory sentence, he or she can change what a person is being charged with (through processes) or, structure it such that the perpetrator is not over-burden with an excess penalty.  Yada yada, etc, etc.  The Natural Law goes into a whole other discussion of what "we as humans" assume as the natural law of governance - a tolerable acceptance, etc. etc.  For instance, Cannibis is illegal at the Federal level but, legal within certain states.  Allowing the states to address the legal issues at that level is "somewhat" of an example of the execution of Natural Law.  By all means, any legal beagles feel free to correct me.

 

In a civil case, fault/no-fault (win/lose) is decided upon at a baseline of 51% vote upon a preponderance of the evidence.  In a criminal case, it requires a unanimous decision.  The measure in civil litigation is much lower than what is required for criminal so... if you take a case like O.J. Simpson and throw $10mn at it, you will eventually create enough muddy water such that the measure to satisfy a criminal conviction is highly unlikely.  However, when the same case is tried in civil court, you will see people like him get completed roasted over an open fire.  Biggest pockets.. absolutely... In a law suit, you name as many people as you can and let each of those prove they are not at fault until someone cannot.  The last man standing owns the fault.

 

The law is not perfect and there are a number of people who will abuse the crap out of it.  I agree with what you are saying in your "dislikes" but, it is what it is.  Supposing you were in N. Korea, Russia, China, or any Muslim country where the laws are either ambiguous or determined by an "anointed" soul... where would you rather be tried or have your case heard?

 

 




Fat bottom Trump
9907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4766

Subscriber

  # 1704152 16-Jan-2017 15:00
Send private message

The adversarial approach to law seems designed to create winners and losers and generate lawyers' fees. Personally I prefer the Inquisitorial system, which I lived under for most of my life and which at its best is more focused on finding truth and obtaining justice than winning and scoring points. 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


 
 
 
 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704165 16-Jan-2017 15:14
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

The adversarial approach to law seems designed to create winners and losers and generate lawyers' fees. Personally I prefer the Inquisitorial system, which I lived under for most of my life and which at its best is more focused on finding truth and obtaining justice than winning and scoring points. 

 

 

 

 

Yeah... I hear you!  The system that throws out all the theatrics and seeks to uncover the root-cause.  Yeah... people fear that one  :)  If it's a truly "unbiased" panel, the truth will come out - no question about that.  Excellent point you make!


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704167 16-Jan-2017 15:15
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

The adversarial approach to law seems designed to create winners and losers and generate lawyers' fees. Personally I prefer the Inquisitorial system, which I lived under for most of my life and which at its best is more focused on finding truth and obtaining justice than winning and scoring points. 

 

 

 

 

Naturally, I have to ask... Military?  Is it the UCMJ to which you refer?


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704183 16-Jan-2017 15:28
Send private message

All this talk of lawyers has gotten me all "hornied up" wanting to go back to law school.   I'd love nothing more than a dog-fight to protect the little guy from a large corporation.  It just chaps my backside when big money can run roughshod over the common man.  #Grrr... you have no idea  :)




Fat bottom Trump
9907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4766

Subscriber

  # 1704217 16-Jan-2017 15:43
Send private message

JimsonWeed:

 

 

 

Naturally, I have to ask... Military?  Is it the UCMJ to which you refer?

 

 

Nope, Napoleon. Europe inherited it from him.

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704218 16-Jan-2017 15:46
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

JimsonWeed:

 

Naturally, I have to ask... Military?  Is it the UCMJ to which you refer?

 

 

Nope, Napoleon. Europe inherited it from him.

 

 

 

 

Ah ok... Napoleonic Law?  Correct me if I am wrong but, doesn't that presume you are guilty at the outset and are therefore required to prove your innocence?




Fat bottom Trump
9907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4766

Subscriber

  # 1704220 16-Jan-2017 15:48
Send private message

Not really. It just doesn't presume you are innocent. That is why there is a trial.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  # 1704224 16-Jan-2017 15:55
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Not really. It just doesn't presume you are innocent. That is why there is a trial.

 

 

 

 

Ok... interesting.  I learned about it a long time ago but, it was "stilted" such that that the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" seemed more appropriate.  In the case you describe, it's either or from the outset and the trial will determine.  On the face value, it seems quite logical.  So tell me... for those who have ever been accused of a crime and subsequently found innocent, does the stigma of the accusation stick with them and follow them around?  I'm very interested in this.  It's a very foreign concept to me.  Please, by all means, share your thoughts and feelings about this.

 

Also.. and please pardon my ignorance in this area but... is this is premise derived from Roman judicial systems or was it purely the making of Napoleon?




Fat bottom Trump
9907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4766

Subscriber

  # 1704243 16-Jan-2017 16:21
Send private message

Full names are never published, so the situation you describe will rarely occur. I am not aware of anyone who has ever been falsely convicted. No doubt some have, but I am not aware of them. If it happens, it is also very rare so there is unlikely to be a presumption of guilt before a case  is heard. I believe the system of inquisitorial justice is derived from the Romans via the church, but this is not a subject I am knowledgeable on. I am sure you can find out plenty about it from Wikipedia and other sources if you are interested. No doubt it influenced the Napoleonic Code.

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1353 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

  # 1704291 16-Jan-2017 17:00
One person supports this post
Send private message

JimsonWeed:

 

Hammerer:

 

I really dislike the following:

 

  • people using technicalities to avoid or escape or subvert or obscure the intent of the law. This isn't limited to lawyers but it is a significant part of what lawyers do.
  • that legal systems in general and our own New Zealand legal system are so often diverted from producing just and positive outcomes. Adversarial systems so often produce win-lose outcomes when more positive outcomes are available such as win-win. I've sat through an entire seven-week fraud trial with four defendants which cost millions to produce an outcome that did not return any of the many millions of stolen money. I'm quite sure that other approaches would have produced the same result without the extensive costs.
  • that the outcomes from our legal system are often a lot like a lottery.   About the only rule that I am aware of is that those with the biggest pockets win far more than they should. This primarily relates to civil proceedings but it is often true for criminal proceedings as well.

 

 

 

There are a number of "schools of thought" that can be applied to the law.  For example, the Black-letter Law, the Natural Law, the Spirit of the Law, etc... Each of these takes into consideration that there is an "ideal" law which should be used as a baseline for establishing "behaviours".  In the US, the criminal aspect of this is referred to as the Model Penal Code.  It's distributed across the whole of the nation but, it's also subject to interpretation.  In the "Black Letter" instance, a woman who steals bread to feed her children is guilty of theft, irrespective of circumstances.  Under this assumption, what is written shall be done.  In the Spirit of the Law, the theft is viewed under extenuating circumstances and guilt/innocence is weighed accordingly.  If a judge cannot skirt a mandatory sentence, he or she can change what a person is being charged with (through processes) or, structure it such that the perpetrator is not over-burden with an excess penalty.  Yada yada, etc, etc.  The Natural Law goes into a whole other discussion of what "we as humans" assume as the natural law of governance - a tolerable acceptance, etc. etc.  For instance, Cannibis is illegal at the Federal level but, legal within certain states.  Allowing the states to address the legal issues at that level is "somewhat" of an example of the execution of Natural Law.  By all means, any legal beagles feel free to correct me.

 

In a civil case, fault/no-fault (win/lose) is decided upon at a baseline of 51% vote upon a preponderance of the evidence.  In a criminal case, it requires a unanimous decision.  The measure in civil litigation is much lower than what is required for criminal so... if you take a case like O.J. Simpson and throw $10mn at it, you will eventually create enough muddy water such that the measure to satisfy a criminal conviction is highly unlikely.  However, when the same case is tried in civil court, you will see people like him get completed roasted over an open fire.  Biggest pockets.. absolutely... In a law suit, you name as many people as you can and let each of those prove they are not at fault until someone cannot.  The last man standing owns the fault.

 

The law is not perfect and there are a number of people who will abuse the crap out of it.  I agree with what you are saying in your "dislikes" but, it is what it is.  Supposing you were in N. Korea, Russia, China, or any Muslim country where the laws are either ambiguous or determined by an "anointed" soul... where would you rather be tried or have your case heard?

 

 

 

 

 

 

One of the things that concerns me most is that the Law is becoming increasingly divorced from Justice. Often the law is upholding rulings and precedents that have gone before, even when it is blatantly obvious that it in no way serves justice.

 

People seem to have forgotten that the law originally derived from justice / moral code and it is increasingly abstract - a philosophy based on previous philosophy.

 

 

 

I've had a few dealings for various things - normally when some one has tried to poo on me. it has been a disappointing bag.

 

1 - Had to pay thousands as I was forced to abide by a contract I had neither seen or signed ( when you sign an agreement to lease, the lease is in force even though you have neither seen or signed it). This is especially galling when the agreement to lease was missing all the pages covering the sections that bound me to the unseen lease - so hadn't even signed a full agreement to lease and definitely not signed anything agreeing to be bound to an unseen lease. Ditto bearing costs of land lords lawyers. The answer came back - you can fight this but you are lilkely to lose and they have more money.  common sense reading of the contract saying I never agreed to those terms or even signed the contract was over written by precedent. that's after my lawyers had seen the physical agreement to lease and not noted it was missing stuff.

 

2 - Ditto taking on ex-business partner. His lawyer lied in his submissions - but the costs of fighting the lies (no this web site doesn't exist even if you can see it in a web browser, no the client didn't take your phone number, even if it goes to their phone) was unlikely to yield any benefit. Was told to settle - despite being slandered (orally and in writing to clients, suppliers and public) and pick up the costs of re-writing a contract to replace the contract previously breached.

 

Actually - "you can fight this but you cant afford to and they have more money. " is pretty much how I sum up lawyers.  That and - that will be a squillion dollars for us to peruse a standard Auckland Law Society contract and re-read the pages we have read a million times before.

 

 

 

 

 

 





nunz

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1356
Inactive user


  # 1704352 16-Jan-2017 19:48
Send private message

timmmay:

 

 The firm is very money oriented, and I typically describe law firms as "a pyramid scheme of bastards, the higher up you go the bigger the degree of bastardry". They treat their people relatively poorly, set targets that are difficult to achieve, and in general the working conditions and flexibility are far inferior to those in IT. 

 

 

 

 

Sounds just like the insurance industry... :/


4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1356
Inactive user


  # 1704358 16-Jan-2017 20:05
Send private message

Actually had a really good lawyer once. Found out about 5 years ago that he died and I was actually sad.

 

On the flip side, I also met some through some other circles. A couple of them were heroin addicts. Hope they got their sh*te together. They had no cares about their "customers", just the $$ and where their next score was coming from.

 

 

 

Still nearly prefer them over car salesmen, RE agents, and priests.


3292 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1077

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1704381 16-Jan-2017 21:07
Send private message

Xile:

I think, just like any occupation, there are good ones and bad ones.


 


Coming from a back ground of law enforcement for 30 years I have had a lot of interaction with lawyers over that time. I have found there are some you could trust and have meaningful dialogue with and some that were just plain nasty and you wouldn't go near.


QFT.

I've had a lot of dealings with many lawyers over the years. Some for personal matters but the vast majority through work. Some were/are awesome, some were/are downright dirtbags. That said only one of them (corporate lawyer) has been an a-hole to me. I shovelled back everything he dished out, so he didn't actually get anywhere.

12738 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4242

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1704433 16-Jan-2017 23:18
Send private message

JimsonWeed:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Not really. It just doesn't presume you are innocent. That is why there is a trial.

 

 

 

 

Ok... interesting.  I learned about it a long time ago but, it was "stilted" such that that the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" seemed more appropriate.  In the case you describe, it's either or from the outset and the trial will determine.  On the face value, it seems quite logical.  So tell me... for those who have ever been accused of a crime and subsequently found innocent, does the stigma of the accusation stick with them and follow them around?  I'm very interested in this.  It's a very foreign concept to me.  Please, by all means, share your thoughts and feelings about this.

 

Also.. and please pardon my ignorance in this area but... is this is premise derived from Roman judicial systems or was it purely the making of Napoleon?

 

 

 

 

That certainly happens in the UK, especially to men accused of sexual offences.

 

The only people in criminal cases who get name suppression in the UK as of right are, I believe, children and rape complainants (who are predominantly female).

 

Accused men are named and reported on and have to make do with a not guilty verdict being enough to stop the mud sticking - which it almost never is, of course.

 

 






1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

HPE to acquire supercomputing leader Cray
Posted 20-May-2019 11:07


Techweek starting around NZ today
Posted 20-May-2019 09:52


Porirua City Council first to adopt new council software solution Datascape
Posted 15-May-2019 12:00


New survey provides insight into schools' technology challenges and plans
Posted 15-May-2019 09:30


Apple Music now available on Alexa devices in Australia and New Zealand
Posted 15-May-2019 09:11


Make a stand against cyberbullying this Pink Shirt Day
Posted 14-May-2019 20:23


Samsung first TV manufacturer to launch the Apple TV App and Airplay 2
Posted 14-May-2019 20:11


Vodafone New Zealand sold
Posted 14-May-2019 07:25


Kordia boosts cloud performance with locally-hosted Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 10:25


Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute in New Zealand opens up faster, more secure internet for Kiwi businesses
Posted 8-May-2019 09:39


Vocus Communications to deliver Microsoft Azure Cloud Solutions through Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 09:25


Independent NZ feature film #statusPending to premiere during WLG-X
Posted 6-May-2019 22:13


The ultimate dog photoshoot with Nokia 9 PureView #ForgottenDogsofInstagram
Posted 6-May-2019 09:41


Nokia 9 PureView available in New Zealand
Posted 6-May-2019 09:06


Motorola Solutions joins local partners to deliver advanced communications network in New Zealand
Posted 30-Apr-2019 21:50



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.