h a l f b a k e r yPoof of concept
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
login
|
|
|
Tag Team Legal Council
Every hour the judge rings a bell and defense and prosecution jump up and switch sides. |
| |
(+5,
-1)
| |
|
|
1- Evens things out so you don't have an incompetent prosecutor and really good defense lawyer. Evenly distributed skill in representation of both sides of the case.
2- The jurors will have it made clear that part of a court trial is cosplaying attorneys being full of shit and bending the truth as
far as possible.
This theme plays while they switch sides.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg
[doctorremulac3, Jun 22 2026]
|
| |
What you are describing is similar to debate squad in high school ... you had to be prepared to argue either side of an issue on a moment's notice, but once committed you saw it through for a couple of hours and a referee decided who won. |
|
| |
And this idea's only half a joke. (Missing an important part of a joke admittedly, being funny) but if the point of the trial is getting the truth out there to the jurors, this is actually something that might be looked into. |
|
| |
Address flaws like this: what of some juror really likes the guy who holds himself better, who articulates more convincingly, who has more passion, who has a nicer suit? We're dealing with humans here. |
|
| |
So maybe not have the Benny Hill theme when they switch sides, but other than that switching sides in a debate is, as you pointed out, a very old standard, just for another purpose. |
|
| |
I'll just say this, if an attorney brags that he wins say, 20% more cases than the average attorney what does that tell you about the efficacy of the process itself? If that metric isn't perfectly even, the process isn't perfectly even and if a process is supposed to provide even justice, well... |
|
| |
I don't believe the process was intended to provide justice ... I think it was intended to give the accused a chance at a fair hearing. |
|
| |
I find the concept of prosecution and defense swapping sides amusing - But each side should complete their argument and final appeal to the jury BEFORE switching sides, then repeat the whole process. If new information emerges it would be interesting. |
|
| |
I'm fine with that. Whatever gets the point across that we're trying to establish facts and the information transfer is quite probably going to be of affected by the skill of whoever's transferring that information. |
|
| |
To use a physics analogy, you've got a big wave of skill and a big dip of skill. Put them both together and have them cancel each other out so you get a nice flat wave. |
|
| |
Okay, weird analogy but lack of skill on one side can wreck this system of justice. |
|
| |
Ooh, two trials one with each law perspective? I see a few problems but an interesting thought experiment. |
|
| |
Say the dependent is found innocent in the first but guilty in the second. Is that a mistrial and does the lawyer that loses both take a loss on reputation/pay/score somehow? |
|
| |
I wonder if the lawyer washouts are the ones who become legislators...? |
|
| |
Good question. Just have another trial with a rotated separate set of lawyers maybe? |
|
| |
Wouldn't be surprised about the worst lawyers getting into politics. Maybe make sure there's balance, need to have at least 3 times as many doctors or engineers to however many lawyers there are. |
|
| |
And come to think about it, engineers build stuff, make systems work, doctors heal people. Lawyers are based on fighting conflicts and having groups being antagonistic to each other. |
|
| |
So, take a problem: We need more electricity. |
|
| |
Engineer: Okay, let's figure out the best way to make more electricity. 4th generation nuclear? Hydro? Working on cleaner carbon based fuels if possible? |
|
| |
Lawyer: Okay, let's find out who the bad guys are. How do we punish them for there not being enough electricty? And most importantly, how do I make money from the process? |
|
| |
It would appear that many here don't know any lawyers with good alignments. I've met a couple, and they are incredible persons who go out of their way to help people who got shafted. I know generic lawyer bashing can be fun, but it's small minded. |
|
| |
I am small minded, I just want a system that works. The current one has issues. |
|
| |
Two close relatives who are attorneys, there are good ones obviously, but I think the system needs improvements. |
|
| |
Well, of course it has issues. It's a human system, battling uphill against both chaos and entropy. |
|
| |
Frank Herbert had a novel where in an interplanetary legal system, an alien race had evolved a courtroom system wherein the winning attorney had to kill the losing attorney with a many thousand years old stone knife, in the courtroom. |
|
| |
It helped to keep frivolous lawsuits to a minimum. Also, if you were sloppy, you gained a reputation as a hacker. |
|
| |
Yikes! Talk about courtroom drama. |
|
| |
Definitely ... it encourages out of court settlements, and makes criminal trials interesting. And CJ Cherryh has an alien race that has legal assassination - The Assassins Guild requires that papers are filed by one party and an assassin assigned to the case only after public notification to all parties and dedicated efforts at a pre assassination settlement are undertaken. |
|
| |