2012-09-05, 02:40 | Link #23261 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
That wasn't a trial by a "jury of peers" it was a trial by a jury of ... well, I'll try to be civil. A jury trial assumes a well-educated population... which we no longer have in this post-industrial reality.
__________________
|
2012-09-05, 04:23 | Link #23263 |
Pretentious moe scholar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 37
|
Man shot dead during Quebec separatist leader's election victory speech.
Going to be interesting to see what the police figure out... violence over the Quebec issue isn't unheard of in Canada but killings are pretty rare occurrences.
__________________
|
2012-09-05, 07:21 | Link #23264 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Quote:
As the election itself, the result could had been worse. The PQ will have to face a strong opposition even if the PLQ'S leader wasn't re-elected so it isn't much likely than they will do much damage.
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 07:25 | Link #23265 | |
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 08:30 | Link #23271 | |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Don't forget, Patent law in the US is already murky. The Jury's role is not to determine if the law is just or not (even though Jury Nullification is a thing), it's role is simply to determine if the parties in a case have or have not broken the law. I think that compared to the alternatives Jury Trial is a fine system. It is far less prone to corruption, and it puts the law ultimately in the hands of the people, and not unelected Judges. Ultimately, the problem here was not the Jury. The problem is US patent law. The law should be changed and clarified. But it is not the role of the Jury to change that law. |
|
2012-09-05, 09:06 | Link #23272 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Think about the impact of immigartion and the increasing of the choice of ingredients ...
As for the french gastronomy, what made it's reputation was the diplomatic and royal ''meal'', ment to impress more than to represent the reality.
__________________
|
2012-09-05, 09:23 | Link #23273 | |
( ಠ_ಠ)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
|
Quote:
Silly Canadians, trying to make themselves look naughty. Ain't foolin' no one bro! *chunks DVD copies of Canadian Bacon at all the canucks 'round here*
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 12:08 | Link #23274 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
OTOH... in the US, I'll assert that Joe Public jury pool is not doing well in terms of basic education either. I've been in enough pools to watch the process. On the odd chance they get someone with a clue, both sides are often culling them out in selection and the judge doesn't call bullshit (as he is allowed to).
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 12:11 | Link #23275 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
You realize 98% of politicians are lawyers, right? What use would lawyers be if the law were simple enough for everyone to understand? And how would you even go about making laws understandable by idiots who drop out of high school (or worse), don't continue an education, and have no marketable skills?
|
2012-09-05, 14:09 | Link #23276 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Quote:
BTW, you know than your sentence would be right in a discution about crime or gun ownship .
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 15:09 | Link #23277 | ||
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Quote:
In terms of a trial, while the law should be easy to understand, it can't be expected that members of the public (who make the jury, defendants and litigants) to be familiar with every single law. That is why lawyers are needed. However, when the time comes to explain the ins and outs of the case to all the public involved, the law should ultimately simple, logical and straightforward to execute. When it becomes so complex and ambiguous, that's a failure of the law makers to write good laws. Also, it's important to note that Juries operate as "finders of fact". They simply evaluate if a defendant has broken the law as it has been told to them by the judge, based on the facts and testimony provided to them by the prosecution and defence. It's not to make sense of loopholes and counter-loopholes, it's more to think "is this guy lying, is this man guilty, whose version of events makes more sense?". So long as the law is drafted in a way that is readily understood by members of the public, the system works. It's only when the law is extremely ambiguous, as it is with intellectual property today, that jury trials fail to function properly. For the system to work, the case really needs to go to the Supreme Court, and the law needs to be untangled and set straight. Most other parts of the common law system are perfectly fine, intellectual property laws are the only particularly bad blemish, on what is otherwise a fine system. I agree that this was the wrong verdict, but the jury was not at fault. If you want to blame someone, blame Washington. They're the ones that have: a) failed to regulate the patent office. That the patent office permits so many bad patents is the whole problem. b) failed to bring copyright and patent law into the 20th century. The jury was simply following the law. That the law is rotten is not their fault. It's not that they were too stupid or uninformed to understand it. And the law is supposed to be "idiot-proof" anyway. |
||
2012-09-05, 15:18 | Link #23278 | |
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-09-05, 18:38 | Link #23280 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
They've done with in some public schools with girls to keep jackass boys from crushing their self-esteem out of the starting gate. I can't say I'm opposed to the idea but wow, its complicated as to whether it helps or hurts. So easily drifts into "segregation->second-rate resources"...
__________________
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
|
|