The Hazards of Duke: Still Proof of Endemic Legal Corruption

Tinkering with the law is dealing with the effects. Of course lawyers and judges are corrupt. So are doctors and businessmen. They all live in the same place that we do-a corrupt society. Corrupt people will corrupt whatever activity they become involved in.

90% of the world’s litigation takes place in America. Isn’t it possible that we are not on the right course?

We have eliminated male authority, which dealt with the spirit of the law and replaced it with a feminized system that can only understand the letter of the law. Male authority was based on the propagation and preservation of the species. Our feminized legal system is based upon the glorification of the self, the ME, the feminine principle.

Asking the courts to change things for the better is like a slave asking the master for better working conditions; the master created them so he had better not complain.

It is time for those who complain about existing laws, which is most of us, to rise up and reassert their manhood and establish a new way of life. It will never be legislated.

Our government is like a very old house with the roof leaking, the furnace broken, and the plumbing rusting. It’s not practical to fix it; it’s time to knock it down and build a new one. But first we had better know what we planto build.

David, I am fully aware that there are differences between your proposal and the South Dakota ballot measure.
I am only stating that your proposal is probably dead on arrival in any legislature, and if placed on the ballot, it would attract the same opposition that the SD judicial accountability measure attracted.
Now if we present this as a measure to discipline dirty rotten no-good lawyers, it would win with a 90% yes vote.
But the minute it is realized that we are also talking about disciplining rogue PROSECUTORS, they will do everything they can to reverse the outcome.
They will claim that our knights in shining armor prosecutors, who for public servant wages stand between civil society and anarchy, rape, robbery, murder, mayhem, and deadbeat dads, ohhh the humanity!, will be forever harassed by “frivolous” complaints brought by the scumbags who so richly deserve to live out their lives as guests of the taxpayers.
For your measure has to apply to prosecutors, or it would not apply to Nifong.
And Nifong, well, he was just a college town aberration! We don’t have ANYONE like him here in Podunk County, no sir!
I am certain you have an excellent well designed proposal Mr. Usher. I trust you on that.
It is just not what the good folks who enforce the Child Support Crusade and the War Against Domestic Violence Committed Against Women, Even If It Is Only Raising the Voice during a Mutual Shouting Match, want.
They did not want the South Dakota judicial accountability measure or the North Dakota shared parenting reduce child support and make everyone happy measure either.
I am not saying these reforms cannot be done. I am saying that this is one of the problems that need to be solved. Far from being a pessimist, I am one who says that there are no excuses, only obstacles to be overcome.
But we do not overcome obstacles by pretending they don’t exist, or using their existence as an excuse to give up.
Keep up the good work, Dave, I’m on your side!

snootfish, I hear your counsel. There are critical times in the evolution of systems when that which has worked for a long time, falls into disrepair. Yes, there are pockets of law where recourse through its older principles has worked well and to benefit. But when an old, comfortable pair of pants become so decrepit that they no longer even contain your most private parts let alone keep you warm, no matter that the pockets are still sound and hold a few coins, then it is time to cast them off.

The ‘migration’ of rot from the anti-family law (‘Family Law’ is Orwellian newspeak) has caused the whole system to become distrusted, justice no longer a concept that the legal system recognises and fairness a joke. It is time to throw it out and start again. Lessons from today and from the past 700 years of struggle may allow us to create a system that is much better.

Key principles so hard fought for – legacy from Dead, White, Males – have been cast aside and must be restored. Hebeus Corpus. The Magna Carta. Innocence until proved guilty. Perjury. These are things of memory.

As for the ‘protection’ of the law, when that depends upon lying, silvered tongues rather than Truth, then the tongues need to be cut out.

I didn’t get where I am now, poor as a church-mouse at this advanced age, by compromising with evil. I will not plea-bargain with the Princess of Lies. She needs to be put to the sword.

We need a new system of Law. We will not get it by patching up the current mendacious rag.

Be careful, amfortas.

When the big company does you wrong, the legal system is the only hope you have.

The same applies when government, your neighbor, or whoever else does you wrong.

The legal system does a lot of good for a lot of people. It on balance usually produces reasonably rational results, and it does it peacefully.

I mentioned tort reform earlier. I think that has made many serious wrongs beyond remedy. The same can be said for excessively broad sovereign immunity. Attacking and dismantling the legal system is a mistake. It leaves injustice and even anarchy in its absence. Frustrations with family law do not really justify general attack on the legal system. One of my biggest frustrations is that most people see the legal system through family law and they get an unduly negative impression of it. The system works reasonably well in most other areas although I do see the “family law mentality” migrating into other areas (yet another reason family law needs fixing). The most fundamental problem with family law in my judgment is that it is immoral at its core (there is no other area of law where right and wrong is so thoroughly ignored). Family law has such an immoral foundation that nothing about it works. It is arguably not even “law” at all.

“The legal profession is out of control”

Of the people, yes. It is self-’controlled’. Self-regulated. Self-monitored. It is a Law Unto Itself. It has shown itself to be completely contemptuous of people, Truth, justice, and cares only about two things: the money it can control; and the power it can wield. ‘Twas always thus – will we allow it to continue as the cancker it is into the future?

A King once said. “Who will rid me of this turbulent Priest?”, and someone made it so. More (‘scuse pun, couldn’t resist)) words in this vein need asking about the Legal Profession.

Roger: Did you really read the article “How To Reform the Corrupt Legal System? Your comment suggests you did not.

It is not possible to enact a valid law that would discipline judges via any publicly-operated mechanism. This would be a direct violation of the “separation of powers” doctrine. Even if passed, it would be quickly struck down the the high courts, and properly so, for this would immediately subject courts to the vagaries of politics.

Read my article again: it provides a method for disciplining attorneys. This will prevent corrupt attorneys from becoming judges. And, when attorneys (including those who operate in public capacity) attempt to pursue corrupt activities before the bench, they will be disciplined. It would change what the Bar does, which presently is to advance the business interests of the “trade”, to what it should be: The administration of justice. This combination will be effective, and pass constitutional muster.

We recently had a proposal in South Dakota to provide genuine accountability for judges with a grand jury that was actually accessible by the public without any gatekeepers.
It lost by a 90% to 10% vote.
The opposition blanketed the media with the claim that such a system would allow jury convicted felons and pled guilty felons to harass the judges who sentenced them by numerous “frivolous” complaints.
We can’t have that!
So how do we sell accountability to more than 10% of the South Dakota electorate (and the voters elsewhere), given the concern about crime and the unpopularity of convicted criminals, however innocent some might be?
Yes, yes, people are appalled by Nifong and by the false accusations of rape, but we’ve been known to lynch men when we believe the rape accusations! We certainly don’t want the prosecutors to pull their punches when it comes to prosecuting rapes where the woman isn’t lying!
Thus we don’t want them no-good varmints harassing our Wyatt Earps and Judge Roy Beans with misconduct complaints, however strong the evidence for misconduct be!
That is, unfortunately, the problem when it comes to re-introducing accountability into the system.

Well, David, at least in my state it has become very difficult to successfully sue a mal practicing Doctor. This is the result of tort reform measures that have made medical mal practice suits much more difficult to successfully pursue and severely limited recovery even if successful. Further, I hardly think Doctors are disciplined any more than lawyers. Your points are well taken but I would question your comparison between lawyers and doctors. It is true I think that the bar associations tend to punish those who criticize the system rather than those who actually misbehave in the system.