Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!bullwinkle!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill
From: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Lie det.. (The REAL way the courts work)
Message-ID: <637@sigma.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Mar-86 20:54:05 EST
Article-I.D.: sigma.637
Posted: Thu Mar  6 20:54:05 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Mar-86 09:29:18 EST
References: <2613@sdcrdcf.UUCP> <872@felix.UUCP> <266@imagen.UUCP> <620@sigma.UUCP> <555@varian.UUCP>
Reply-To: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Lines: 25

In article <555@varian.UUCP> fred@varian.UUCP (Fred Klink) writes:
>[...] Please keep in mind that the prosecutors are for the most part not
>very experienced either.  In a perverse sort of way, the usual criminal trial
>fought out by a member of the DA's staff and a public defender may be the
>*fairest* trial in the US. [...]

Maybe they aren't where you come from, Fred, but in Washington State they
are _very_ experienced professionals (unlike public defenders, who, if they
are any good, soon leave for private practice).

Also, your idea of a "fair" fight falls apart after you examine the system
a bit more. Case in point: The prosecutor has a budget to pay for "expert"
witnesses, who will testify against the defense. Many of these "expert"
witnesses are often local acquaintances who work with the prosecutor often, 
and know the ropes of testifying for the prosecution. The costs are very small.

A defendant on the other hand has to shell out not only for his defense
attorney (if he wants to avoid using an over-worked, under-paid, and often
marginally competent attorney) but for his "counter-expert witnesses", some
of whom are _very_ expensive and often come from great distances.

This is fair??


--