4 ms·

Personally, I think there should NOT be a prosecutor's office and a public defender's office. It should be the same lawyers, and randomly get the cases for or a

Personally, I think there should NOT be a prosecutor's office and a public defender's office. It should be the same lawyers, and randomly get the cases for or against. That way the resources are in the same 'pot' if you will. Still have to contend with the fact that a mere accusation colors public perception, and so often gives the advantage to the prosecution in the court of public opinion

mchannon 3y ago
Perhaps a good idea in theory, it'd be horrible in practice. Enough "horse-trading" goes on as it is (you go easy on client A, I'll offer client B up to you on this other case on a silver platter; that way we both make our numbers and look good). A better idea would be the appointment of a special "evidence master" who holds and controls all evidence and determines who gets to see what evidence, with a bias toward everybody seeing everything. Right now police turn their evidence over to prosecutors and prosecutors determine what the defense (and public) see. If prosecutors don't want them to have something, they don't get it, and no one's ever going to know. I have real trouble believing any society where prosecutions rely on bluffing and brinksmanship to coerce plea bargains is a fair and just one. There should be no plea bargains. There should also be no peremptory juror challenges. In all honesty, I think AI would be a great candidate to replace both prosecutors and defense attorneys. The playing field would finally be level for once. Judges too.