Korean Job Discussion Forums

[LGSakers]

[mc_jc]

I will clarify my statement;

In the context of my post, the people I am claiming who support the system and call it 'the best' are those who stand to profit from the outcome.
This does not mean 'justice was served' because there was a lot of motivation surrounding the trials- be it political or reputation.

- The Petit trial occurred during the mid-term elections. Both candidates running for governor ran on the platform of 'law and order'. By allowing a mistrial, it would've been seen as justice was not served and many of the politicians would questioned by the media for allowing a killer to go free.

- In regards to the murder of Annie Le at Yale, the university wanted the investigation to be done expediently as so the school could continue on with the school year and in such a way that the university's reputation was not tainted, as was during the murder of the jogger at East Rock Park.

Those who benefited from the outcomes of the trials are the ones who will claim the judicial system is 'the best'.


But I said it has flaws.
Clear enough for you?

[Fox]

[Fox]

[mc_jc]

[TheUrbanMyth]

[Fox]

[mc_jc]

There is nothing argumentative or adversarial about my responses.
However, your responses seem to be isolating only one aspect of the post without fully reading the rest. If you had read the rest of the post, you would know what I was saying.
However, you are isolating one particular part of the post while calling the rest drivel, you might have your reasons and motives to do that, however in the spirit of the OP, I was basically trying to reinforce what the op was implying by giving a few examples of further injustice that happens in the US. However, since you refuse to read the rest of the post, you are oblivious to the argument.

Are you aware of how to debate?
When a person debates, they take into account both sides of the argument as not to be seen totally one-sided; which in this case I agreed that the US judicial system is flawed and full of mistakes, while I mentioned that people with certain interests during certain cases feel that justice was dispensed- hence, their claims that they consider it 'the best in the world', when we both know it's not.


TUB- I agree.
The US judicial system primarily serves a certain purpose during certain time periods. These days, especially during election periods, many politicians pledge a get-hard-on-crime attitude in which they focus on a particular case and instead of looking at the cases objectively, they use the cases in question to rally votes.
This causes many mistakes to be made when dispensing justice.

[Fox]

[mc_jc]

Then you have shown yourself to have another motive in your agenda other than to ask a question.

Whether you care or not, you showed enough concern about showing your opinion (or should I say, masking your opinion behind your "question") to keep your argument going.

Obviously you have an agenda that you want to press- too bad you are afraid to make your opinion known openly and have to hide behind your "question".


You're right, this is boring.
I prefer to have a meaningful discussion about a topic without it being hijacked by someone who wants to make their point, yet are too afraid to do so.



Have a nice day*

[bucheon bum]

[Kuros]

The main problems with the US Justice system stem from American democracy and the people:

Tough on crime wins votes

The Death Penalty is popular

Racial prejudice in the jury

Elected judges are more likely to convict

[Sergio Stefanuto]

Whilst I couldn't agree more that executions based on miscarriages of justice are extremely unpleasant, I have performed a cost-benefit analysis of capital punishment, factored this cost in, and decided that I would still prefer to have capital punishment than not. Executing murderers and child rapists is, in my judgement, not only a duty, but also a privilege and a joy. I can scarcely think of anything more sane, rational and decent.

[Mosley]

What Sergio said...well said, mate....

[Space Bar]