T1B

This maybe the problem... with our "perfect" system.



the truth

no, they only know the legal system as their career, you fucking idiot.

Screw_Michigan wrote:no, "they only know the legal system as their career", you fucking idiot.

I'll take that as an oxymoron, and will look for somebody with a brain, and their thoughts.


the truth

have you seen the lonliness of a middle distance runner?

Screw_Michigan wrote:have you seen the lonliness of a middle distance runner?

No.

But I went to Berkeley.

Could you enlighten me?



m2

I guess not.(my drunk)


the truth

m2 wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote:have you seen the lonliness of a middle distance runner?

No.

But I went to Berkeley.

Could you enlighten me?



m2

let's see the degree, gunt. you've been called out on this already.

Go to sleep... my "rave" brother.

Let me know, if you want me to post that PM you sent me???


Get some sleep, and let tommorrow come to you.



m2

But I went to Berkeley.

Living proof that the hippies fucked goats.

Also conclusive proof that marijunana and acid do have long term memory loss affects.

Should Judges... always be lawyers???

That just might be the dumbest question that I have ever seen. Props on being number one at something.

What next?

Should writers... always know how to read???
Should swimmers... always know how to swim???

You are an epic moron.

Derron wrote:

But I went to Berkeley.

Living proof that the hippies fucked goats.

Also conclusive proof that marijunana and acid do have long term memory loss affects.

...I mean, RACK.

Rack Fu wrote:

Should Judges... always be lawyers???

That just might be the dumbest question that I have ever seen. Props on being number one at something.

What next?

Should writers... always know how to read???
Should swimmers... always know how to swim???

You are an epic moron.

Concur. Having sat through court proceeding run by a local yokel non-lawyer, I'd have to say that an individual well-versed in legal precedents, admissability of evidence, etc. is preferable. The whole "I don't know a lick about law but got elected as the smartest chimp in the clan" is utter bullshit.

The Judge put the screws on one of my clients the other day. Sometimes it takes a Judge to do that.......

Should tard faggots always build windchimes? Sure.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

Rack Fu wrote:

Should Judges... always be lawyers???

That just might be the dumbest question that I have ever seen. Props on being number one at something.

What next?

Should writers... always know how to read???
Should swimmers... always know how to swim???

You are an epic moron.

Concur. Having sat through court proceeding run by a local yokel non-lawyer, I'd have to say that an individual well-versed in legal precedents, admissability of evidence, etc. is preferable. The whole "I don't know a lick about law but got elected as the smartest chimp in the clan" is utter bullshit.

One of the biggest problems with the legal system in New York is that town and village justices are not required to be lawyers, and as a point of fact, in rural areas town and village justices who are lawyers are the exception rather than the rule.

I'm considering running for town justice in the town where I live next year, to remedy that in part.

funny --
about town justices not being lawyers--
one of my last speeding tickets I went before
the local JP who was also the driver ed teacher
at the school where I was teaching !!!

worked out for me

Mace wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: Concur. Having sat through court proceeding run by a local yokel non-lawyer, I'd have to say that an individual well-versed in legal precedents, admissability of evidence, etc. is preferable. The whole "I don't know a lick about law but got elected as the smartest chimp in the clan" is utter bullshit.

One of the biggest problems with the legal system in New York is that town and village justices are not required to be lawyers, and as a point of fact, in rural areas town and village justices who are lawyers are the exception rather than the rule.

I'm considering running for town justice in the town where I live next year, to remedy that in part.

The same is true in Iowa for many of the smaller rural counties. We call them Magistrates and they only hear simple misdemeanor and traffic cases.

In New York, town and village justices have jurisdiction over misdemeanors, violations (relatively minor offenses that are not considered crimes or traffic infractions) and traffic infractions allegedly occurring in their municipality. They have limited jurisdiction over felonies, said jurisdiction being limited to conducting a preliminary hearing to determine whether there is probable cause to hold the defendant for the action of a grand jury, and also to set bail on the defendant. They also have civil jurisdiction over cases where at least one of the parties is a resident of the municipality and the amount in controversy is not more than $3,000, as well as all landlord-tenant matters arising in their jurisdiction.

City courts have the same jurisdiction, except that the upper limit on civil jurisdiction for city court is $15,000 in controversy, and also, in cities with a population of more than 200,000, traffic infractions are not heard in city court but are referred to an administrative adjudication bureau. City court judges must be attorneys, however.

Any attorney in the county who applies for the appointment is given preference over a lay person also applying for the job.

Mace

Unfortunately, it's not that way here. You have to be elected to a town or village justice position.