I love the US Court System

[VorpalCyberWolf]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13221673/?GT1=8211

discuss.

[KentaRawr!]

... Ahem... ah... well...

>_> That's just him, obviously. :p

[NeoCracker]

The saddest part of that is one of the attornies actuall needs to "Bone up" on the rules.

[bipper]

That is just Reatarded. That judge should be beaten and sent to mexico. The lawyers were arguing for a reason, and silly games of chance is no foundation for a government.

[kidney / theif]

:erm: :laughing:

Um, it that for real? .. Of course it is. How sad.

[RPJesus]

That is retarded.
Though, they're one bad bunyon to talk, saying 'miffed'.

[Dignified Pauper]

if no one is going to secede their position, it is the judges duty to find a way for them to agree. It's not the judge to decide, he simply presides over the court and makes sure things run smoothly. Unless this isn't a trial by jury, then who knows. then he just doesn't want to decide, because no lawyer has made a good enough case, therefor, it matters not where it is.

[jesteranimefreak]

Amusing, but impartial..... though it is disturbing. But there isn't a law against it either.

[StarChild]

that's just wrong 0__0

[Dignified Pauper]

for all of you who say it is wrong, what do you propose the judge do? he does not have the power to pick the location anyways. He has to force the attorneys to do something and if they are unwilling to budge, then this is the best way to do it.

[eestlinc]

that's awesome.

[NeoCracker]

More courts should have judges willing to do strange things like that to get the job done.

[StarChild]

I guess, I mean that it's not "wrong", it's just different. It's honestly the judges decision.

[SammieBabe]

Oh God, only in Florida....:rolleyes2

[bipper]

for all of you who say it is wrong, what do you propose the judge do? he does not have the power to pick the location anyways. He has to force the attorneys to do something and if they are unwilling to budge, then this is the best way to do it.

No, this is wrong. A judge cannot force manipulate any party's case. The way the lawyers were argueing, the judges should have said I need a decision in 1 minute, or ordered a recess. The judge cannot make decissions for the defending/prosicuting party.

The judge acting this way in court is obsurd. Justice is not a game of chance. Its a game of liying, cheating, stealing, and whatever it takes to get an acceptable and presentable truth. The judge is to direct, and possibly execute manditory mininums and maximums. There is more to it than just that, but playing games of chance (assumably) to make any disision outside of his own though, is plainly out of order.

Bipper

[eestlinc]

all he did was say if you two lawyers can't determine <i>what room to interview a witness in</i> then you will play rock paper scissors and whoever wins gets to pick the room. He didn't make any legal decision by chance. He was just trying to resolve a petty dispute in an impartial manner while simultaneously showing his irritation at the lawyers who couldn't even agree on a neutral site.

[Madame Adequate]

No, this is wrong. A judge cannot force manipulate any party's case. The way the lawyers were argueing, the judges should have said I need a decision in 1 minute, or ordered a recess. The judge cannot make decissions for the defending/prosicuting party.

I imagine they had been arguing for more than a minute already, and what was the judge to do if a decision couldn't be reached? He couldn't throw the case out, because the defendant's lawyer would just have to dick around until that happened. He couldn't order it in a particular room (I don't know why, TBH, that seems like a perfectly reasonable thing for a judge to do, but apparently they can't do this). So he did something to show how petty the lawyer's disputes were, and try to resolve it.


Justice is not a game of chance. Its a game of liying, cheating, stealing, and whatever it takes to get an acceptable and presentable truth.

But it is still a game. :rolleyes2

What's the betting it becomes "Best two out of three"?

[bipper]

Point standing, if they cannot agree on somthing - nothing should happen. The judge can't even simply say, "You are going here, and you are going here" and that room. There had to be a reason that one wanted this and the other wanted that. A judge will give each side equal and fair treatment. That is his responsability. Nothing is fair about making decisions based on chance.

And yes, it is a game metephorically speaking:rolleyes2

one more thing. This is the argument:
The argument was over a location to take the sworn statement of a witness in an insurance lawsuit.

Bipper

[Madame Adequate]

Point standing, if they cannot agree on somthing - nothing should happen. The judge can't even simply say, "You are going here, and you are going here" and that room. There had to be a reason that one wanted this and the other wanted that. A judge will give each side equal and fair treatment. That is his responsability. Nothing is fair about making decisions based on chance.

Nothing... is meant to happen? So he just sits there for hours, days, weeks, while the lawyers argue over some pathetic and trivial point, using up his time which could be spent adjudicating something worthwhile, and using up the courtroom which could be used to investigate a matter of more importance than which room a witness is interviewed in?

[bipper]

The case moves on as it normally would. Been in a very similar situation while I was waiting for my friend's round on a driving after revocation. One gentelman's representation was unable to decide exactly how to present certain information, so the judge gave him 5 minutes, then 1 more. He then told the lawyer if he could not wrap it up, the judge would have to move along with the rest of the trial. In this case; the representation began speaking and stuttered his way through the case. Needless to say, the defence (which we was representing) lost that one.

I am also wondering why it mattered... where they took the sworn statement. Is that usually not part of standard procedure?

bipper

[DeathKnight]

That is just Reatarded. That judge should be beaten and sent to mexico. The lawyers were arguing for a reason, and silly games of chance is no foundation for a government.

why to Mexico???

[Venom]

Thats how I solve everything, Rock papers scissors.

[bipper]

That is just Reatarded. That judge should be beaten and sent to mexico. The lawyers were arguing for a reason, and silly games of chance is no foundation for a government.

why to Mexico???

Kind of a satirical irony on my view of legalizing illegal immigrants.

[Shlup]

all he did was say if you two lawyers can't determine <i>what room to interview a witness in</i> then you will play rock paper scissors and whoever wins gets to pick the room. He didn't make any legal decision by chance. He was just trying to resolve a petty dispute in an impartial manner while simultaneously showing his irritation at the lawyers who couldn't even agree on a neutral site.
My thoughts exactly. I find it very amusing.

[Roto13]

I am also wondering why it mattered... where they took the sworn statement.
It doesn't matter. That's why this stupid way of choosing also doesn't matter.

[DeathKnight]

That is just Reatarded. That judge should be beaten and sent to mexico. The lawyers were arguing for a reason, and silly games of chance is no foundation for a government.

why to Mexico???

Kind of a satirical irony on my view of legalizing illegal immigrants.

Yeah, but you know what's funny, I'd like to see the majority of americans which happen to be caucasians driving taxis, cleaning bathrooms, working their asses off in farms, etc. Legalizing immigrants is the only happy way. Though, I do believe the border NEEDS to be sealed off.

[bipper]

I am also wondering why it mattered... where they took the sworn statement.
It doesn't matter. That's why this stupid way of choosing also doesn't matter.

And how do you know it did not matter? The room could have a lot to do with the out come of the case. Mabey it affects the witness in some questionable way and requires stepping out of certain boundries to do so. There could be a legitimate debate on whether it IS relevant or not, as we ARE talking about takeing swarn statements and not the entire interview as stated. If it matters or not, this is no way for a judge to act. I am generally glad that he scolded the lawyers; but mocking them in such away is equally as unprofessional.




That is just Reatarded. That judge should be beaten and sent to mexico. The lawyers were arguing for a reason, and silly games of chance is no foundation for a government.

why to Mexico???

Kind of a satirical irony on my view of legalizing illegal immigrants.

Yeah, but you know what's funny, I'd like to see the majority of americans which happen to be caucasians driving taxis, cleaning bathrooms, working their asses off in farms, etc. Legalizing immigrants is the only happy way. Though, I do believe the border NEEDS to be sealed off.
haha. Lets keep it to topic though :) that is why I just left a bit of a hiddenist bit in my message.
Bipper

[Dreddz]

Seems like someone was in a rush to watch the footie....

[eestlinc]

nobody in the US watches "footie"

[DeathKnight]

nobody in the US watches "footie"

Quoted for truth. Now if you say American Idol, THAT'S a different story.

[bipper]

wtf is footie lol...

[NeoCracker]

wtf is footie I cried aloud with mirth and merriment...
Qouted for Truth.

[DarkLadyNyara]

Having been on the losing side of a case, largely due to lawyers being idiots with technicalities, I'm behind the judge 100%. They were delaying the case in an incredibly petty manner, bickering over somthing with no bearing on the isue, so the judge put a stop to it. Good for him.


The room could have a lot to do with the out come of the case. Mabey it affects the witness in some questionable way and requires stepping out of certain boundries to do so. There could be a legitimate debate on whether it IS relevant or not, as we ARE talking about takeing swarn statements and not the entire interview as stated. I seriously doubt it. If it was an important issue, the lawyers would have appealed the decision.

[bipper]

This is true; unless they really are that low grade