Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!netcomsv!mattn
From: mattn@netcom.COM (Matthew Nichols)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Fate of the FOIA
Message-ID: <1991Jun1.031958.27718@netcom.COM>
Date: 1 Jun 91 03:19:58 GMT
References: <1qes34w164w@cellar.UUCP> <1991May31.203017.19854@Think.COM>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 36


>In article <1qes34w164w@cellar.UUCP> rogue@cellar.UUCP (Rache McGregor) writes:
>>On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that bilingual citizens could be barred 
>>from jurors if their ability could make them skeptical of the official 
>>translation.
>
>>   Such a Court would seem hostile to the Fully Informed Juries Act, by 
>>allowing jurors with definitive skills (language, analytical ability, 
>>computer skills, etc.) to be excluded from hearing the details of the case.  
>>What fate would the FIJA have if "expert jurors" may be barred?

	This ruling is simply insane. Yes, I understand that the primary
reason for the ruling was racisim, and I personally don't see racisim as
the motivation for the baring of the bi-lingual jurists. Rather, I see
something more subtle and insidius: the desire for a quick conviction
without regard to determining guilt or innocence.
	Verbal communication is not an exact science, and all languages
have degrees of subtle variation and interpitation. It is ludicrous to ask
a trial jury to simply accept the "official" interpitation of the defendants
testimony, and the only purpose to ask them to do so would be to subvert our
justice system.
	IMHO, it would be far better to REQUIRE jurists to be bi-lingual
in cases where the defendant or plaintiff does not speak english... as
well as, perhaps, to requre the Judge to understand the language in question.
	Perhaps this is just another rambling call for more legislation, but
one of the few areas of our Government that we cannot afford to make mistakes
in is the judicial system. It is far too important to be allowed to be
subverted by self-serving prosocuters with an eye on political advancement.
-- 
*****************************************************************************
Matthew Nichols............................................ mattn@netcom.COM

                "A man's got to know his limitations."
                
                               -  "Dirty" Harry Callihan
******************************************************************************