Jason Caminiti English 1/4:05 04 - OCT - 95 Assignment #1
This new role has been played out over and over in the judicial system for many years now. No longer is it the trial of a wrongly accused man with an attorney fighting to save his life, or freedom. This sort of case will probably never happen again. If it does, it will undoubtedly be pushed into oblivion by the producers of Court T.V. who will be showing the newest and highest rated trial of the week. Not only did this mentality show itself in the Simpson trial, it also appeared in several other trials. The trial of Lorena Bobbit, was mutated into the trial of John Wayne Bobbit, the rapist. One other trial which has been talked about within the last few years speaks of a man who was robbing a house, fell and sued successfully for damages due to personal injury. These types of trials show that in today's age we are no longer worried about justice, the ethics don't even come into play any longer. Lawyers will drudge up anything true or not which supports their case, no longer worrying whether they are doing their moral best to uphold justice. These new trial lawyers will do anything to win, how you play the game is not what matters, it's the million dollar salaries that count. How are these salaries obtained? By winning the game, and certainly not by playing fair. Chivalry is truly dead, honor is deplete, and justice is most definitely unjust.
The really sad thing about this is that it isn't contained only between the plush settings of a courtroom. It transcends many facets of American society. The sports teams may still play fair on the field. However when it comes to money deals, it doesn't matter how you get to the outcome, as long as the payment is worth the means. People are doing this in their daily lives, no one works their way to the top any longer now they demand it. There are unions which were set up to help the working man's strife, now do much more than just that. They now demand that they get certain benefits and wage increases, not dependant on how well they do their job, only dependant on the fact that they do. Even in academics the feeling has fallen from honesty almost to the slogan "Cheat to win." It is well known that there always has to be two sides to every battle. The winners and the losers. However, in today's mentality it seems that instead of the slogan "May the best Man/Team win," it is "may the person who can cut the most corners to come out on top win."
The truly sad part about this is that I am probably very wrong. This is probably not a new thing. I, being so young, and only having experienced so much may be misled into believing this is a recent phenomenon. However, it seems to be inherent in the American way. Were we brought up to win no matter what, or were we just predetermined to learn it due to our ethics to begin with. When you make an institution where you must have two sides, both struggling for victory, and have no real proof of guilt or innocence. However, give both sides the right to argue with what evidence exists, are you not setting up a system for this type of thing? After all, in the judicial system there is always at last one side that is telling a lie.
This essay is Copyright (C) 1996 Jason Caminiti. You may not use any part of this essay without written permission of it's author.<-Home->