My concern is legal issues that lead up to being in front of that impartial jury. One would have had to have been arrested and gone thru all that encompasses. Jail,fines, electric monitoring (they don't give away monitoring, it's costly), in many cases loss of job, embarassment to family, more fines and the every popular and often expensive drug courts/counseling. And the eventual years of drug testing, probation officers and court referral officers...each with their hand out for $$.
9 times out of 10 when I ask a group addicts in rehab how their addiction effected their loved ones they always say financially... from burning money in the years of use to the government taking it (money and property) away from the user and his family as punishment. So our population of single parent homes and welfare rolls grow accordingly. Addicts who could use AND pay their bills find themselves trying to recover while their family suffers financially.
Just seems to me there has GOT to be a better way to deal with these issues.
Just seems to me there has GOT to be a better way to deal with these issues.
Think about what I've been saying under a justice system operated by rational judges, lawyers and prosecutors. I know it's a stretch to the moon -- especially since judges have been routinely violating the constitution for more than a hundred years -- who would ever accept the case wherein the supposed victim is asking for an impartial jury trial to decide in his favor that he has been harmed by a person minding their own business. No rational person would take on any aspect of the case because the supposed victim is not a victim. He merely proclaims himself to be a victim. The fact probably is that no person would ever try to file such a claim.
The way it is now, it's always the State vs Defendant. Thus there are millions of cases brought before the courts. If it was the Victim vs Defendant there would be less than a thousand cases brought before the courts.