Friday, April 25, 2025

another milestone

  In a milestone event for my grandson, he has been published in the Maryland Law Review. This publication from the University of Maryland is quite prestigious. It is something those involved with the law would recognize and appreciate. It certainly isn't for the layman. I was reading his article and admit to struggling with some of the terms and explanations offered. All the citations are there in the footnotes and it would take many hours for me to read those. I was impressed, I can't deny that. He is sounding like a lawyer, no doubt. I did attempt to read the entire document but it turned out to be a bit much for this old mind. I will read more of it at a later date.
 I haven't had the chance to talk to my grandson about this paper at any length. I believe I got the main point. It seems like he is saying that the victim and the criminal should be on equal footing in every case. He was discussing the case of Syad V Lee. A case in the news here in Maryland. As with all these things that case has been an ongoing thing, appeal after appeal filed, and all without a satisfactory outcome, that's my opinion on that, not my grandsons. My grandson explaining all the procedural steps that should be followed. It falls in line with what the Democrats are now saying about "due process" in this Garcia case being litigated in the court of public opinion. The big argument being about whether the "victim" in this case, Garcia, received every protection afforded by the law. But like I said, I haven't discussed any of that with my grandson, so it's just my thoughts.
  Regardless of what his review says or doesn't say I am swelling with pride at his accomplishment. Not only was his work accepted and published by this prestigious magazine but he wrote it while attending school in the evenings, working in the day, and now raising a small child. All of that without any "special programs" to make it possible. It was accomplished through his own work ethic, determination and drive. Did I mention he is also a "licensed" referee for soccer and officiates college level soccer matches on the weekends. I won't pretend to fully understand all that document has to say, it's a technical document for lawyers in my opinion. It concerns the engineering of a judicial system. I just try to operate within those confines, not understanding the entire mechanism. 
 For me, the law is an attempt to remove all emotion from the litigation of a case. Lady liberty is blindfolded and holding the scales of justice. As Joe Friday of Dragnet fame said, "just the facts, maam." In that scenario the victim and the accused are on equal footing. Is that possible? I mean is it truly possible to have a judge or jury completely unbiased in their opinions? I don't believe that is possible. We are all human beings subject to emotional response, even when we don't show them. I'm saying you can never really know the heart of another person. 
 The job of a lawyer is to convince you that whatever side of the issue he/she is defending, is the only correct response. Guilty or not guilty. Or, barring that, you are just a little bit guilty. Then you may be just a bit guilty but some technical issue happened so it should be retried. Perhaps a different result could be achieved. That's why it is called an appeal. An appeal to procedure, or is it an appeal to an emotion? In Syad's case, he is still guilty of first degree murder, robbery, kidnapping and false imprisonment. He is currently free, however. There are some technical issues to be resolved. He committed those crimes in 1999. Here we are 26 years later still discussing all of that. Procedure or emotion? I'll be interested in what my grandson has to say about that when I get the chance to talk with him. I have to say I agree with his premise that both victim and accused should be on equal footing, I believe that is the intent of the law. Still, it is had to reconcile that with my emotional response. He's still guilty, regardless of any technical procedure overlooked. 
  Should I ever require a lawyer to defend me, I'm thinking Mark would be the one I would call. I have no doubt that everything would be done to the proverbial "letter of the law" as Mark is that sort of man. There are no short cuts with him, no bending of the rules. He will stand his ground, steadfast under all conditions. I first saw that when he became a referee. As a teenager he stood on the field, as adults confronted his decisions, sometimes inches from his face hurling insults, and calmly explained the rule. When some persisted he stopped the game, asked the person to leave the facility and informed everyone the game would not continue until that happened. Yes, it happened, the person was ejected and the game resumed. That's the rule! Perry Mason and Matlock would both be proud. I know I am.    

                                                                          
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol84/iss3/5

This is the link to Mark Reicharts' paper should you like to read through it. 

No comments:

Post a Comment