2 ms·

Let's stop this tail-chasing and get to the bottom of the true difference: US (and most common-law) judges are neutral arbiters, strictly opining based on what

Let's stop this tail-chasing and get to the bottom of the true difference: US (and most common-law) judges are neutral arbiters, strictly opining based on what evidence is there (Adversarial System). This is not how it works in civil-law systems, especially Germanic ones (of which PRC has retained more-or-less despite its communist history), which are entrusted to discover the truth, even if it seems to favor a party, and can do things that would be very questionable in an adversarial system, such as directly calling witnesses (Inquisitorial System).

dragonwriter 2y ago
> and can do things that would be very questionable in an adversarial system, such as directly calling witnesses (Inquisitorial System). https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_614 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_614 Rule 614. Court’s Calling or Examining a Witness (a) Calling. The court may call a witness on its own or at a party’s request. Each party is entitled to cross-examine the witness. (b) Examining. The court may examine a witness regardless of who calls the witness. (c) Objections. A party may object to the court’s calling or examining a witness either at that time or at the next opportunity when the jury is not present.