Cato Institute On Criminal Justice System

The Cato Institute, hardly a left wing organization given its advocacy for lowering or abolishing most taxes, opposition to the Federal Reserve system and the Affordable Care Act, the privatization of numerous government agencies and programs including Social Security and the United States Postal Service, etc., asserted a few years back America’s Criminal Justice System Is Rotten to the Core. 

Why?

1. Unconstitutional overcriminalization
2. Point‐​and‐​convict adjudication
3. Near‐​zero accountability for police and prosecutors

The third one is the most relevant to this site's purpose. When prosecutors such as John Choi can willfully obstruct justice to protect fellow lawyers without consequence and law enforcement ignores complaints agaisnt prosecutors no matter how good the evidence, it is it is clear our justice system in not just broken but institutionally corrupt. 

The level of crime in a society depends mostly on how much the public believes judicial system is fair and just.  When judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and law enforcement are able to get away with breaking the law, it has as multiplier effect on the crime rate throughout society.  I wish more people understood this. 

Male Power

Male Power Over Females Is Not the Default Social Dynamic in Primates. 

Guess what? We are primates. 

The study found that no particular pattern of intersexual power can confidently be attributed to the ancestors of many major groups of primates, and therefore an assumption of ancestral male-biased power is not warranted.

So much of what we think we know is based on what we want to be true. 

The reality is:

• Women are not the weaker sex.
• Women can fight just as well as men.
• Women are just as intelligent as men.
• Women are just as emotionally stable as men. 
• Men are just as sympathetic as women.
• Women are just as abusive as men. (This is often controversial but if you substitute whites for women and blacks for men, how would you view it?)

California Adopts Duty To Report Rule For Lawyers

Unlike most states California never adopted the The American Bar Association model Rule of Professional Conduct which requires lawyers to report serious misconduct of another lawyer.

Now they have. 

Effective August 1, 2023, Rule 8.3 requires:

A lawyer shall, without undue delay, inform the State Bar, or a tribunal* with jurisdiction to investigate or act upon such misconduct, when the lawyer knows* of credible evidence that another lawyer has committed a criminal act or has engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,* deceit, or reckless or intentional misrepresentation or misappropriation of funds or property that raises a substantial* question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.

Why did California finally adopt Rule 8.3? Mostly because of one lawyer - Thomas Girardi.  Over a 40 year period Girardi had over 200 complaints filed agaisnt him yet he continued to practice law. Many of his fellow lawyers knew how corrupt Girardi was, and some had substantial evidence, yet failed to say anything. 

The real question is whether the now in effect Rule 8.3 will change anything. I suspect not. In Minnesota we have had this rule since it came out in 1983 yet not a single lawyer has ever been disciplined for not reporting another lawyer who they knew had committed serious misconduct.  

In my case, every lawyer, including the judges, who saw the evidence against Nelly Wince should have reported her. Indeed, they were, and still are, obligated to do so. Yet not a single one did. 

The rule, at least in practice, is for show. It fools the public into thinking lawyers are able to police themselves. The reality is quite the opposite.  

Benevolent Sexism

Benevolent sexism occurs when a sexist action is viewed as normal or positive by society including, often, the person affected. Actions such as opening a door or carrying a package for a woman fall into this category. But it also includes such "positive" comments such as stating that as a woman a person is more caring than a man.  It also includes expectations such as as men doing dangerous jobs, including military combat.  Anytime you hear a woman is better than a man in some regard or that a man should perform a dangerous action rather than a woman it is considered benevolent sexism. 

A new study explores the downside of benevolent sexism and how it is viewed by those who witness it.

In other words, benevolent sexism, due to its seemingly positive guise, is less likely to be immediately recognized as a moral violation, and consequently, it does not elicit the same level of moral anger as hostile sexism does. This difference in perception and emotional reaction means that bystanders are less likely to feel compelled to intervene in cases of benevolent sexism.