# 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:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**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 13, 2011, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/21 "2011-01-13T03:53:33Z")
An ideal may not be attainable. But if serves a useful purpose in setting a direction for progress. Before you decide what needs to be changed, you have to establish what your goal is. For example: “no guilty person should escape justice” and “no innocent person should be falsely convicted” - I think most people would agree those are both worthwhile general principles. And either one alone is easy to put into practice. But trying to impelement both at the same time is very difficult. So you need to decide which one is closer to your ideal and where the balance lies between them. Then when you’ve reached a consensus on where you want to go, you can begin discussing means of how to get there. ---
**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 13, 2011, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/22 "2011-01-13T03:55:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I guess I had a different reaction to “ideal.” Ideal functioning, but not perfect knowledge. I think an argument can be made that an ideal legal system is designed to simulate the effect of perfect knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2011, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/23 "2011-01-14T19:29:48Z")
> [@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. That’s not true. Someone already mentioned crimes of passion. People are not fully rational beings, and would not always think out the consequences. Even if they were fully rational, you’d still have at least two classes of crime that would still occur. 1. Civil disobedience, in which the entire point is to show the injustice of a law. 2. Crimes where the benefits outweigh the punishments. These aren’t common, but they can happen. I guess if “ideal legal system” involves some kind of perfectly crafted laws, then those might not be factors. I’m not even sure you can write such laws, though. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/24 "2011-01-15T16:41:06Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > 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. This is not true. Once the police has a “reasonable” idea you did something criminal they will pursue you and only seek evidence to prove that you did it. They generally don’t look at evidence that could vindicate you at all once they reach that point. Many “mistakes” are made not due to a lack of evidence, but interpretation of evidence or laws. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/25 "2011-01-15T16:43:37Z")
> [@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. One of the most important things courts due is deal with questions if laws themselves are valid. The problem is law is not about morality as everyone has a different idea of morality. That bing so there could be no perfect paladin of justice. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/26 "2011-01-15T16:51:48Z")
To me an ideal system would eliminate much of what we think of in terms of a criminal system. It would be far less adversarial. Justice would deal with dealing with a situation in a way that helps everyone involved in the best possible way. This includes the “criminal”. If something is criminal is done then the system works with the victims, the perpetrator and society in general. It would not be a vengeance system as we have now. The “criminal” would be not locked up for X time based on what he or she did. They would be helped to be a productive member of society instead of being made a criminal who is discriminated against. If they are a danger to the public then they should be kept separate from society until they are not if that ever happens. That does not need to be our standard definition of prison. It could be a segregated society that is self supporting in many cases. ---
**Author:** ![Candyman74](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/27 "2011-01-15T17:12:14Z")
> [@iamthewalrus\_3](#): > > 1. Civil disobedience, in which the entire point is to show the injustice of a law. > 2. Crimes where the benefits outweigh the punishments. These aren’t common, but they can happen. > > I guess if “ideal legal system” involves some kind of perfectly crafted laws, then those might not be factors. I’m not even sure you can write such laws, though. Yeah, a perfect legal system would not have any unjust laws. You’re right in that one cannot craft such a thing, and that a perfect legal system is not possible. But the concept makes for a good brain-food. ---
**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 15, 2011, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/28 "2011-01-15T18:44:25Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > To me an ideal system would eliminate much of what we think of in terms of a criminal system. It would be far less adversarial. > Justice would deal with dealing with a situation in a way that helps everyone involved in the best possible way. This includes the “criminal”. If something is criminal is done then the system works with the victims, the perpetrator and society in general. It would not be a vengeance system as we have now. The “criminal” would be not locked up for X time based on what he or she did. They would be helped to be a productive member of society instead of being made a criminal who is discriminated against. If they are a danger to the public then they should be kept separate from society until they are not if that ever happens. That does not need to be our standard definition of prison. It could be a segregated society that is self supporting in many cases. Only the court system is designed to be adversarial. And that’s intentional - the idea is that adversarial confrontation will cause all of the relevant issues to be brought to light during the trial. But the other parts of the system, like the police system and the penal system, are not designed to be adversarial. Police and prison officials would be delighted if criminals would “buy into” the system and cooperate with them. That doesn’t happen obviously but that just shows that the adversarial nature you talk about can’t be reformed away - it’s inherent that criminals are not going to want to be subject to any legal system. So no matter how you design your system, criminals will oppose it and make it adversarial in practice. Your ideas on rehabilitation are sound but nothing new. The legal system has been based on the rehabilitation model for over a century. Everyone agrees with what you’re saying in theory - the problem is nobody is able to achieve these goals in practice. Nobody has ever been able to come up with a method where you can generally rehabilitate somebody else - all we can do is offer people opportunities to rehabilitate themselves and many criminals choose to not use these opportunities. So segregation becomes the de facto justification for imprisonment. And that, at least, produces results for society if not the individuals who are imprisoned. But society owes something even to the individuals it imprisons. It would be morally wrong to abandon them in some segregated society like a stereotypical “Prisoner Island”. Even convicted criminals are entitled to the protection of the law. ---
**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 15, 2011, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/29 "2011-01-15T18:48:06Z")
> [@smileybastard](#): > > One of the most important things courts due is deal with questions if laws themselves are valid. That’s not really true. The idea is that the people, through their elected legislative representatives, decide whether or not a law is morally valid. The court is only supposed to rule based on what the law is not on what its officials think the law should be. The only issue of validity that the court is supposed to rule on is whether a law conflicts with some other higher law. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/30 "2011-01-15T19:01:01Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Only the court system is designed to be adversarial. And that’s intentional - the idea is that adversarial confrontation will cause all of the relevant issues to be brought to light during the trial. I realize only the trial is “designed” to be adversarial and I understand the reasons. The truth of that matter is once the police see reasonable cause to arrest you it becomes adversarial and even a bit before. If you have ever been interrogated by the police you would realize this. They have only one goal - to find evidence to use against you. On a bigger scale the fact that they want to throw you in jail and punish you instead of seek justice also puts a adversarial slant on it. Why are so many people afraid of the police? (And I mean law abiding people.) It is because of this very thing. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But the other parts of the system, like the police system and the penal system, are not designed to be adversarial. Police and prison officials would be delighted if criminals would “buy into” the system and cooperate with them. That doesn’t happen obviously but that just shows that the adversarial nature you talk about can’t be reformed away - it’s inherent that criminals are not going to want to be subject to any legal system. So no matter how you design your system, criminals will oppose it and make it adversarial in practice. I have been in the court system and I have been in jail. I was very cooperative. The point is that mentality of the corrections officers is you are bad and deserved to be punished. Some are quite nice, but that is the exception and mostly they are nice because it makes their jobs easier. Try not to assume so much about criminals. Most did pretty minor things and just want to finish their punishment as do many of the one who have committed worse things. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Your ideas on rehabilitation are sound but nothing new. The legal system has been based on the rehabilitation model for over a century. Everyone agrees with what you’re saying in theory - the problem is nobody is able to achieve these goals in practice. Nobody has ever been able to come up with a method where you can generally rehabilitate somebody else - all we can do is offer people opportunities to rehabilitate themselves and many criminals choose to not use these opportunities. Actually this is not true. Rehabilitation has been bantered about and is not generally done. The system has never shifted from one where if you do X then you serve Y amount of time. It never shifted from US vs Them. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > So segregation becomes the de facto justification for imprisonment. And that, at least, produces results for society if not the individuals who are imprisoned. I have no idea what you intended that to say. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But society owes something even to the individuals it imprisons. It would be morally wrong to abandon them in some segregated society like a stereotypical “Prisoner Island”. Even convicted criminals are entitled to the protection of the law. I never suggested like some prisoner island and I never suggested they were not protected. I mean something less punishment oriented than prison. I mean something where they do need to work to have something above a sustenance level just like in the real world. Something where even if they are segregated that they can live a more normal life. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/31 "2011-01-15T19:03:23Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > That’s not really true. The idea is that the people, through their elected legislative representatives, decide whether or not a law is morally valid. The court is only supposed to rule based on what the law is not on what its officials think the law should be. The only issue of validity that the court is supposed to rule on is whether a law conflicts with some other higher law. Exactly whether it conflicts with things like human rights, societal rights etc. And that is one of the courts most important functions. ---
**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 15, 2011, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/32 "2011-01-15T19:14:56Z")
I think you have an unrealistic view of how the legal system works. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/33 "2011-01-15T19:26:09Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think you have an unrealistic view of how the legal system works. Well mine is based on personal experience as well as about a year and a half of research. What is yours based on? ---
**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 15, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/34 "2011-01-15T21:23:17Z")
A lot more experience and research than that. ---
**Author:** ![smileybastard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@smileybastard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smileybastard)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2011, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370/35 "2011-01-15T22:29:00Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > A lot more experience and research than that. Right. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-many-acquittals-would-you-have-in-an-ideal-legal-system/567370.md?page=1)