# How many acquittals would you have in an ideal legal system? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 12, 2011, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370 "2011-01-12T18:51:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/1 "2011-01-12T18:51:12Z")
My assumption is that an ideal court system would find every innocent person innocent and every guilty person guilty. But feel free to make a disagreeing argument. But a legal system is more than just a court system. It also includes the police system and the grand jury system. In an ideal legal system, these agencies should also be doing their roles perfectly. An ideal police department would never arrest an innocent person and an ideal grand jury would never indict an innocent person. So it would seem that in an ideal system, there should be only guilty people passing through. The police would only arrest the people who commit crimes, the grand jury would indict them, and the courts would convict them. But I’m troubled by this conclusion. When I picture an ideal court system, I don’t think of a system where every trial ends with a guilty verdict. That, to me, somehow seems like a faulty system not a perfect one. So would a system where some innocent people get falsely arrested and then exonerated in court somehow be better? Or a system where some guilty people are acquitted despite their guilt? Neither of these possibilities seem better. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/2 "2011-01-12T18:56:36Z")
If every participant in the system had perfect knowledge, not only would there be no prosecution of innocent people, but there would presumably be no crime either – since potential criminals would know that they would certainly be caught by the omniscient police and convicted by the omniscient courts. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/3 "2011-01-12T19:32:37Z")
Well, there are two parts to the legal system: 1. Did the person commit the crime they are accused of? 2. What punishment is appropriate? In an “ideal” system we’d know guilt with a certainty. No one would be accused of a crime they didn’t commit. Thus, if you were accused you are, essentially, guilty. This presupposes no one can game the system and frame someone (which I think is where the OPs worry over everyone being found guilty comes in). In an “ideal” system this could not happen. For the second part you need to decide what mitigating factors there are in the crime. Someone may have shot person-X but the reasons for it can mitigate the sentence. Presumably with the perfect info that can be assessed as well and punishments doled out in a fair and unwavering manner. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/4 "2011-01-12T19:36:10Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If every participant in the system had perfect knowledge, not only would there be no prosecution of innocent people, but there would presumably be no crime either – since potential criminals would know that they would certainly be caught by the omniscient police and convicted by the omniscient courts. See: that Tom Cruise movie with the 3 psychics… ---
**Author:** ![EristicKallistic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/85e7bf/32.png) [@EristicKallistic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EristicKallistic)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/5 "2011-01-12T19:43:53Z")
Well I think the issue here is that the two branches (the executive as represented by the police and the judicial) are really checks on each other. The reason the judicial exists is BECAUSE the executive isn’t perfect. If we could somehow guarantee that police would never make mistakes, we wouldn’t need a judiciary to check them. We’d still need it to check that the legislative branch is making good law, unless we also presume they are perfect. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/6 "2011-01-12T19:51:08Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If every participant in the system had perfect knowledge, not only would there be no prosecution of innocent people, but there would presumably be no crime either – since potential criminals would know that they would certainly be caught by the omniscient police and convicted by the omniscient courts. I’ll admit I started from the other end of the legal process - the courts. But you raise an interesting issue. Would an ideal police department catch every guilty criminal? I’m even less comfortable with that idea than I am with an all-guilty court system. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/7 "2011-01-12T19:54:15Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I’ll admit I started from the other end of the legal process - the courts. But you raise an interesting issue. Would an ideal police department catch every guilty criminal? I’m even less comfortable with that idea than I am with an all-guilty court system. Well, depends if the cops have to come looking for you or you just get insta-busted. If insta-busted then we’d all be nailed for crossing against the light, riding our bike on the sidewalk and driving one mile per hour over the speed limit. That’d suck. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/8 "2011-01-12T19:57:01Z")
Since the standard for arrest (and indictment) is probable cause, we might imagine a perfect grand jury that indicts a person and the perfect petit jury that acquits them, since the petit jury must find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/9 "2011-01-12T20:21:12Z")
Mistakes in the legal system occur primarily from lack of evidence. Thus a perfect system would imply that complete evidence indicating guilt or innocence would always be available. Since many crimes are committed in private, this further implies that the authorities would have access to everyone’s most private lives. Would you be willing to give up your privacy for a perfect legal system? I wouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Candyman74](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/10 "2011-01-12T21:05:14Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If every participant in the system had perfect knowledge, not only would there be no prosecution of innocent people, but there would presumably be no crime either – since potential criminals would know that they would certainly be caught by the omniscient police and convicted by the omniscient courts. Indeed, the existence of the courts is _because_ the prior stages are imperfect. If they were somehow perfect, courts would have no reason to exist. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/11 "2011-01-12T21:44:56Z")
Right. Given ideal behavior, we could allow the cops to act as judge, jury and executioner. No need for law-talking guys at all, just empower the perfectly just paladins of law enforcement to do as they see fit. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/12 "2011-01-12T21:58:29Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Right. Given ideal behavior, we could allow the cops to act as judge, jury and executioner. No need for law-talking guys at all, just empower the perfectly just paladins of law enforcement to do as they see fit. That would describe Judge Dredd and his fellow judges (ignore the movie…that sucked): > [@](#): > > Dredd is an American law enforcement officer in a violent city of the future where uniformed Judges combine the powers of police, judge, jury and executioner. Dredd and his fellow Judges are empowered to arrest, sentence and even execute criminals on the spot. > > SOURCE: [Judge Dredd - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Dredd) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/13 "2011-01-12T23:08:51Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If every participant in the system had perfect knowledge, not only would there be no prosecution of innocent people, but there would presumably be no crime either – since potential criminals would know that they would certainly be caught by the omniscient police and convicted by the omniscient courts. Crimes of passion. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/14 "2011-01-12T23:16:59Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Well, depends if the cops have to come looking for you or you just get insta-busted. > > If insta-busted then we’d all be nailed for crossing against the light, riding our bike on the sidewalk and driving one mile per hour over the speed limit. That’d suck. That’s the kind of thing I was thinking about. I certainly know I wouldn’t consider it ideal if the police caught me every time I was speeding. But that’s the kind of issue I’d like to discuss. Why do we support laws that we also want to break with impunity? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/15 "2011-01-12T23:19:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Since the standard for arrest (and indictment) is probable cause, we might imagine a perfect grand jury that indicts a person and the perfect petit jury that acquits them, since the petit jury must find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. But this is a discussion of an ideal legal system. I think we’d all agree that ideally an innocent person wouldn’t have been arrested and faced a grand jury much less a court trial. And from a societal point of view, we’d have all been better off skipping the cost of a trial. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/16 "2011-01-12T23:23:25Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But this is a discussion of an ideal legal system. I think we’d all agree that ideally an innocent person wouldn’t have been arrested and faced a grand jury much less a court trial. And from a societal point of view, we’d have all been better off skipping the cost of a trial. I guess I had a different reaction to “ideal.” Ideal functioning, but not perfect knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/17 "2011-01-12T23:34:42Z")
Guilt in many criminal laws isn’t something that can be readily determined before the decision to arrest or prosecute. That’s why what you conceive as an ideal situation doesn’t sit well with you - Cops aren’t there to determine whether an individual’s acts are worthy of reprimand. ---
**Author:** ![EristicKallistic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/85e7bf/32.png) [@EristicKallistic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EristicKallistic)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2011, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/18 "2011-01-12T23:51:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I guess I had a different reaction to “ideal.” Ideal functioning, but not perfect knowledge. I was just mainly going by this from the OP: [QUOTE=Little Nemo] An ideal police department would never arrest an innocent person and an ideal grand jury would never indict an innocent person. [/QUOTE] Agreed that it’d be a different situation wholly if it weren’t that way. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/19 "2011-01-13T00:07:36Z")
We might also consider whether “jury nullification” is a proper part of an ideal legal system. That is, are there actions which a “perfect” police force, DA, and court would find violated the laws but for which a jury of peers would refuse to convict? Perhaps related (and related to the “getting caught every time you speed” point) - is it better that misdemeanors are not always caught? If every speeder were fined, would we demand higher (and more dangerous) speed limits? Also, are you considering that the police, DA, and grand jury always know if a witness is lying? Surely there are cases with sufficient evidence to bring a trial (even in an ideal system) but which a jury would find insufficient to convict (perhaps because they disbelieve a key witness). ---
**Author:** ![Noel\_Prosequi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b19c9b/32.png) [@Noel\_Prosequi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noel_Prosequi)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/20 "2011-01-13T02:15:28Z")
I suspect your use of the word “ideal” is not coherent. It’s like the “perfect father” who has to make mistakes so that his kids learn from how he deals with that. The problem is that the idea of “perfect” breaks down, as does the concept of “ideal” in your formulation. The better approach is not to elevate the reality of the criminal justice system to an ideal by magically erasing imperfection, but to start with an assumption that there will be imperfection and see how it deals with it. And I would note, as others have, that acquittals are not always about whether an offender shot/stabbed/punched the victim. They are often, for example, about difficult questions of reasonableness - was it reasonable for the accused to act in self-defence with this particular degree of violence in this particular situation? There is no reliable way of judging these essentially social questions in advance, as it were, until the jury delivers its verdict. Thus, even a perfect police force couldn’t second guess the answer to these sorts of cases. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370.md?page=2)