Will AI Improve The Legal System?

A few days ago during dinner with another couple they mentioned their daughter was doing a lot of AI coding. Which surprised me as I knew their daughter was a lawyer. Lawyers are well known for being on the Luddite end of the tech spectrum. Not so their daughter. She had been working for a law firm but got tired of the lawyers bragging about their billing rate as well as how much they were able to increase their billable hours. Often at the expense of integrity. So she changed jobs and is now using AI to, hopefully, give the legal system more transparent pricing. And better equality and justice. 

We often hear about the negatives of AI but there are clear positives as well.  But, of course, it takes a person motivated to make the world a better place.  

The Power Of The Judge

 The power of the judge in family court. 

When you give a person excessive power, they are highly likely to abuse it. 

Corruption Harms Us And Ukraine

Although not obviously related to this site, I feel the incredible idiocy and blatant corruption of the Trump administration is pretty much the same thing which has been going of in the judicial system for a long time. It is all corruption. It is all about money and power. This particular video highlights what can only be called treasonous behavior by the Trump Administration. Russia, remember, has been supplying intelligence and weapons to Iran to kill American soldiers. 

The Silver Bullet

The silver bullet in family law refers to a a party using false allegations against the opposing party. 

Few things can sidetrack a divorce case as effectively as an allegation of abuse, especially if that allegation turns out to be false. Unfortunately, such claims are becoming increasingly common. Known as the “Silver Bullet Method,” these false allegations have become a strategic tool used to gain an advantage in court proceedings. The approach – referred to as both the “Silver Bullet Method” and the “nuclear option” in legal circles – can have a devastating impact, immediately separating people from their homes, children and assets.

It’s challenging to pinpoint statistics on this phenomenon. A 2021 article in The Psychiatric Times estimates that false abuse allegations appear in 2% to 35% of all cases involving children. Anecdotal evidence from legal professionals suggests that women use this tactic significantly more often than men; although it can be employed by either party. Another study found that parents separated from their children were 86% more likely to face “unsubstantiated claims of abuse made against them.”

I do not know how widely used it is but I do know my ex-wife used it against me. This along with her and her attorney's blatant fraud made her millions. It also led to the kids deciding on their own to live with me and have only limited contact with her. I wonder if she believes it was worth it.

Minnesota Legal Ethics Book

The Minnesota State Bar Association has published an ebook titled, Minnesota Legal Ethics. It is not a bad book per se. For example, regarding truthfulness it states:

Honesty is a fundamental requirement for lawyers. New lawyers take an oath not to use “falsehood or deceit.” Minn. Stat. § 358.07(9). A lawyer who uses any deceit in litigation commits a misdemeanor and is liable for treble damages. Minn. Stat. 8 § 481.07. The Rules forbid false statements, particularly statements made “knowingly.” See, e.g., Rules 3.3(a), 4.1.

Like the Minnesota State Bar's lawyers rules of professional responsibility, which are essentially the same as the American Bar Association's model rules, it is well written and quite reasonable. The issue is that lawyers ethics are widely ignored. It is an open secret. I know this because many lawyers have told me so and even more importantly I have seen violations of legal ethics, not to mention criminal statutes, not only ignored but rewarded.  I even have about the clearest evidence possible.  

The reality is that the statues and rules designed to enforce legal ethics are just widely ignored words on paper. 

Judicial Ethics

In a Orwellian twist the Justice Department had filed a judicial misconduct complaint against several Minnesota judges who spoke out against ICE's illegal actions in Minnesota earlier this year. The judges were not only within their rights to speak out but were, in fact, doing what they are supposed to do a judges.

MPR has a good story on it as well. 

“As legal-ethics experts have confirmed, I was acting well within the ethical rules that apply to federal judges in speaking to the New York Times,” Schiltz said “Indeed, in February of this year, the Committee on Codes of Conduct issued an advisory opinion to emphasize that federal judges may ‘[speak] and [write] on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence.’ That is exactly what I did.”

A court spokesperson responded on behalf of Tunheim, echoing Schiltz’s statement that the comments were permitted under federal rules for judges.

It is a bit surreal for me as I have lots of hard evidence of lawyers and judges acting unethically, yet such actions have been completely ignored by the bar association, the justice system, as well as law enforcement. The insanity of it is mind boggling. 

Contempt Of Court

One of the strangest concepts in our legal system is being jailed for contempt of court. A judge at his or her discretion can do so without due process. Judge Ireland threatened to jail me after I lost my job if I did not pay alimony. In the end, I had to fork over $250,000 to buy out the alimony and avoid jail. Painful, especially considering my ex-wife only got alimony due to her perjury and her lawyer's fraud. 

Jailing for contempt of court is considered coercive not punitive. It is designed to force someone to do something, It is also indefinite. 

In 2009 H. Beatty Chadwick  was released after 14 years in jail for contempt of court. 

Chadwick was jailed in April 1995, accused of hiding $2.5 million from his ex-wife during divorce proceedings. Chadwick maintained he lost the money in bad investments. In 2006, before the economic downturn, experts estimated the money would be worth more than $8 million.

After repeated attempts to have himself freed, Chadwick's request was granted by Delaware County Judge Joseph Cronin, who determined his continued incarceration had lost its coercive effect and would not result in him turning over the money.

It is so strange that a judge can jail someone indefinitely without regard to the facts as there is no process in the contempt of court process to determine the facts. In my case, I believe the judge either didn't like me pointing out corruption in the legal system or he knew one of the guilty parties.