equality before the law, truth or fiction?

[Chlodwig I.]

I'm not sure if someone asked a similar question.
if that happend lately let this poll vanish in the nirvana of the I-net
and I have to search harder.


Okay the Big Question
Does everyone in your country live by the same laws when he is in a trial at a court?
Do you belive that equality before the law exists?
Do you believe that judg/es or a Jury only judge the case and not the person or its lawyer?

Do you beleive that a rich guy get the same sentece as a poor guy for the identical crime?

[CyberFist]

In theory, yes, in practice, no.

[Lord Consul]

Some people are always "more equal" than others.

For example: Try to file a lawsuit against a known magistrate. Unless he has done immense and flagrant damage, he'll most likely wipe the court's floor with your face.

Lawyers, judges and the like have a vast network of friends and favours. They usually win most cases they get involved with.

And Trial by Jury is the worst thing ever invented. The Jury is always overemotional and it tends to focus on erroneous details to reach a decision.

[CyberFist]

If I was Hitler, prosecutors would be vehemently prosecuted

[humvee2800]

LAWYERS, RAUSS

MACHT SCHNEEL!

[pannonian]

The Mudpit is for current affairs. The Academy is for theory.

To the Political Academy this goes.

[the Black Prince]

in practice there should be equality before the law. justice is blind to the face of the defendant and all that jazz.

in practice, it just doesn't happen.

factors the court take into account when considering sentence will always favour a more well off defendant, not through any direct bias of the judges, but the nature of the guidelines... and its a well known fact that corporate criminals rarely get comparable sentences to other types of property offenders



i work for a government body that oversees the provision of legal aid in england and wales. I know that the rates we pay to solicitors on the criminal defence scheme are a lot lower than almost all solicitors would charge if they were doing privately funded work, and the best solicitors charge even more. if you can afford to instruct someone like michael mansfield QC to defend you, you're far more likely to be successful than if you employ someone doing publicly funded defence work.

statistics also indicate that the police and CPS are more likely to impose a police caution on someone from a better off background than someone from a working class background for the same offence. though this in part has to do with the demeanour and attitude of the people concerned, and the fact that a caution requires an admittance of guilt

[Rush Limbaugh]

in a word NO

[Bovril]

Unfortuneately, wealth plays a massive role in how likely you are to get the desired result in this country, both in civil and criminal cases. So, no, there is not equality; in a capitalist system there never can be.

[mongoose]

No. Since we have a wonderful free-marketes type legal system, the fantastically wealthy have a gigantic advantage over the common folk. See Paris Hilton.

[RusskiSoldat]

Someone will always be more equal, so no, however I believe the current degree of it in America is quite impressive.

[mongoose]

That's true. Relatively speaking, we are very well off.

[LoZz]

i belive their are double standards in the uk legal system and law enforcement.

[Trey]

I'm not sure if someone asked a similar question.
if that happend lately let this poll vanish in the nirvana of the I-net
and I have to search harder.


Okay the Big Question
Does everyone in your country live by the same laws when he is in a trial at a court?
Do you belive that equality before the law exists?
Do you believe that judg/es or a Jury only judge the case and not the person or its lawyer?

Do you beleive that a rich guy get the same sentece as a poor guy for the identical crime?

Well the US system (and all systems based on the British one) are adversarial. Thus, it is whoever is able to represent their side better is 'right'. So yes, usually truth comes out, but not always.

[RusskiSoldat]

I don't know about the new Russian justice system (Putin instituted trials by jury recently) but when the judges used to hand down decisions, you nearly always knew your verdict before the trial started. In the USSR, if a case went to court, the man was convicted.

[kev-o]

Its suppossed to, but no, the law isn't equal. After all justice is blind.

[Ummagumma]

I voted 'Don't know or don't care', but purely through futility. Some countries are worse than others, from what I have seen, but essentially if you have the right backing you can almost get away with murder. Sometimes it is not almost. There is very little we can do about it though, even in the most democratic of countries.

[Big War Bird]

I voted 'Don't know or don't care', but purely through futility. Some countries are worse than others, from what I have seen, but essentially if you have the right backing you can almost get away with murder. Sometimes it is not almost. There is very little we can do about it though, even in the most democratic of countries.

I advocate the nationalization of the legal profession. No one should be a ble to buy their way to justice through high priced lawyers.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

I advocate the nationalization of the legal profession. No one should be a ble to buy their way to justice through high priced lawyers.

Thats a bloody good idea

Nope, in America i seriously doubt if black people are equal before the law and in the UK i doubt that Muslims are equal before the law

[chilon]

This is a tricky question.

Someone could be "equal" under the text of the law but the application of judicial equality relies on individual people.

Ideally the system would be constructed to treat everyone equally under the law.

Nope, in America i seriously doubt if black people are equal before the law and in the UK i doubt that Muslims are equal before the law

If you look at cases like OJ Simpson, I think rich black people are "more equal" than poor white people.