The Day of Labor - September 3, 2007

Before I am burdened with my pessimism, I want to share my weekend.

I sat on the couch all day Saturday. That statement is meant to be taken in the most literal of meanings. I told the roommate that I was planning to watch football all day. She did not think I would leave an imprint on the couch as a result.

Sunday garnished studying in an effort to make up for my lackadaisical Saturday. When dusk rolled in, so did my disdain for reading and note-taking. A trip was needed, and I did not care with whom I went. As luck would have it, my roommate felt the same way.

Nautical Mile, located 15 minutes from my house, is stationed on the water and is home to a bustling social scene. A downsized Sunset Strip, the Mile is packed with enough boat sales dealerships that each such establishment could, very well, sell a boat to each of the patrons at each of the packed bars.

Bars buttressed neighboring bars. An alcoholic's dream, one after another. Sufficient to say, there were a lot of bars. These were very different from those I am used to, though they are as crowded as Los Angeles bars. The Mile was packed with muscles the size of small grapefruit. The steroid business must be doing well. In addition, the "sleaze" demographic was well represented. Perhaps a creeper convention was in town.

The bars were all outside, which is very odd coming from California. Drinking in public, at a bar was somewhat unsettling. Alas, these are things I will get over.

Sunday night was definitely a good way for my roommate and I to relieve the cabin fever we had so easily procured from the previous days.

But life in law school is not as cheery as it may seem. Though I am intrigued (a word I have overused as of late) by the readings and the lectures, I am downtrodden by these same readings and lectures.

As I continue my studies, I am realizing that there is a substantial shortcoming to the legal process which I once so fervently believed was rightfully deemed the justice system.

Cases that scream unjustified are, somehow, termed valid as a result of the case law of the past. In discussions with my roommate this morning, I yearn to be a federal judge, holding an appointment for life barring any catastrophic failure in my service. I want to make decisions based on justice and righteousness within the bound of the law itself instead of relying on the rulings of cases of the past. Oh, to have dreams.


I sometimes see case law as more burdensome than justified. As they say in the rules of evidence, "the prejudicial value outweighs the probative value" or, in this instance, the positive effects of the application of case law leaves much to much room for loopholes: the damage caused by the idealistic equality in application of the laws and punishment can be put to ill-use.

In other cases, judges have an obvious bent. We read a case where a doctor wished to try a skin-graft on a child's burned hand. This was a great opportunity for the doctor to try new science. The doctor promised the hand would be returned to "100 percent" following the surgery. The skin graft was taken from the chest of the patient and applied to the palm of the hand. The surgery failed to bring the hand back to 100 percent. Not only was the hand as bad as it was prior to the graft, but the hand was now hairy as well. In court, a judgment was handed down for the patient in excess of around 3000 (I believe). The judge stated that the judgment was far too much.

I asked myself this: if I were the judge I would ask either myself or the doctor this question: what is the most you would pay to keep your hand from being removed from your body? That is a valid judgment in this particular case.

But, often, the case is unscrupulous. That kind of use of the justice system really bothers me.

In criminal law, our readings were on Good Samaritan laws, bystander intervention and bystander indifference. Many times, Anglo-American laws refuse to legislate morality and it really grinds my gears. We are, in some matters, willing to say that the taking of a life is a crime, but, in the same breath, allow the indifference of the commission of a crime.

"'You stay out of my way, and I'll stay out of yours.' That is an extreme expression, but it constitutes an important thread within the Anglo-American sociomoral fabric..." - John Kleinig, Good Samaritansim

What a scary thought. This kind of thinking drives me to excel in the field of law so that I can make a positive difference on society.

And, interestingly enough, a person does not bear any burdens in the legal system as far as acting to prevent or stop a criminal act or victimization of their siblings (including calling for help in a medical emergency). These are the things they should have told me at a younger age. [This also applies to adult children helping their parents, even if they are unable to help themselves. Sorry Mom and Dad.]

Can we legislate morality? Who ultimately has the audacity to do so? (I am not alluding to Barack Obama, so do not even go there.) The better question is: Can we afford to allow immorality? Think of Kitty Genevase (read: victims of crime where bystanders do nothing). What will you determine is correct when you are the victim?

The answer is clear.

Who says dreams are shattered? I still have mine.

----

A professor told us that attorneys are the most important and influential people in society. I did not understand him at that particular instant, but his words are becoming increasingly clear as I invest an increasing amount of time in this field. Stay tuned for why...