The courts & their decisions?

Question

What do you think about how the courts render decisions? Two exacally, the same incidents, different States and different judgments. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 the highest.

Answer 1

Not sure what you are talking about so it makes it hard to answer your question.

As noted by a previous answer, different states have the ability to enact different laws.

Another problem is the assumption that the two incidents are the same. Part of the judicial process -- whether a case is tried by a judge or a case is tried by a jury -- is to decide the facts. While a news report might summarize two cases as having similar facts, the jury or judge at one trial might have come to a different conclusion about the facts based on their determination of the honesty of the witnesses (which will probably be vastly different than the reporters determination).

Answer 2

Well, with different states, you have different laws in effect. Possibly different elements for definitions of criminal actions, almost certainly different interpretations of those laws. So, while the "incidents" may be the same, the laws that apply are not.

Even within that, you have different judges reaching different interpretations -- and as long as those are both reasonable and do not contradict the existing binding authority -- you could end up with different outcomes even under the same set of laws.

That's the best you're going to get. Judges are human, have opinions and make mistakes. The appellate procedure evens out some of that, but anything based on humans is never going to be perfect.

Answer 3

Don't know what you are talking about but I do know that basically the law is an ***. It is meant to dispence justice and all it does is make lawyers wealthy and protects big business and criminals, if they have enough money or clout. Pretty cynical but not too far from the truth I think.

Answer 4

What decision are you talking about