Can You Afford To Go to Court?

Suit yourself!

Do or dare!

---

In the US, courts theoretically operate by Natural Law. Natural Law is based on tradition, that is, previous verdicts ARE “the law.” Each case must be interpreted by the jury. On the other hand, lawyers hate runaway juries, because their paralegals have to re-learn “the law.” Consequently, judges usually instruct the jury before deliberation only to determine if the accused is guilty or not according to the existing law(s), but not to query if the law is fair and applicable. That, however, directly goes against the very essence of the jury system. The average citizen wields the most power, when sitting on a jury, because the jury’s verdict becomes the latest version of “the law.” To put it simply, people of the jury can determine what kind of a country they want to live in, at least as far as the scope of the trial extends.

The losing party of a court case having to pay the winner is not supposed to happen, as it does at courts in the rest of the world that operate under Positive Law (aka. written law, usually interpreted by the presiding judge). The US system is supposed to protect equality under the law.

On the other hand, accusations tried in criminal court can be considered “reckless endangerment of life and limb” in the US, so the defendant, if found innocent, can sue the accuser for legal expenses and more. This practice has been picking up in the last 30 years and is used to silence opposition. Originally, it was introduced against court sharks, who used to litigate with trumped-up charges, but settled out of court, which saved money for the defendant...

So, you decide for yourself: can you afford to go to court as a plaintiff?