[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Hi Jackie,
Yeah, and that becomes a separate issue. Most of the laws regarding the
admissability of evidence are flexible enough so that it depends on the
judge's ruling. And it makes sense that a highly skilled attorney will
be able to make a more compelling argument in court as opposed to a less
skilled attorney. So the defendant who has the most money has the best
chance on winning these kind of issues. But I don't think laws can be
written to be so rigid that the judge does not have the opportunity to
consider the specifics of a case and rule accordingly.
In summary, I don't have an answer to how to solve the problem. :)
Bill
On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 03:22:57 -0600 Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>Hi Bill
>
>I am getting a little apprehensive about some of the recent rulings of
>courts. It seems with our reactive type laws and policies, we forget
>the
>middle ground and swing from one side of the pendulum to the other.
>And, of
>course, there are some that will have the money again to fight any of
>these
>rulings so it just seems to increase the inequality in how justice is
>distributed.
>
>jackief
>
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
