StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm not sure whether I should post it here or under News, but...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18702311/?GT1=9951

Wow...a trial accusing three of inciting terrorism on the internet, and the judge turns out not to understand the concept of a Web site or a forum; seems he's never even used the internet before.

I wonder how often this kind of things happen? When people go to court over stuff like piracy, or companies go to court over things like source code (see SCO), do the judges really understand the concepts involved or do they judge based on the definitions they are given by others in court over things they don't have the slightest clue about?

More importantly, what should be done? Do you pass it off to another judge? Try to teach the existing judge?

Although this is bad it does make a certain sort of sense. Not everyone will be familiar with the Internet or computers, and Judges will inherently be older and hence more likely to fall into this category. Its only recently that a lot of these concepts have become mainstream and not a form of specialist knowledge.

To an extent the possibility always exists that a judge or other legal specialist won't understand something that is outwith their area of knowledge, never mind computers. For example I design safety systems for oil platforms, and if one ever went wrong (and touch wood it doesn't) it would probably be very hard for any layman to be able to properly understand the design premise and operation of some of the systems, just due to lack of familiarity with the concepts. And they are fairly straight forward in nature once you understand them, unlike computers.

Changing the judge probably won't happen for this reason - it probably happens all the time, just doesn't get reported. He'll probably have a 5 year old grandson who will teach him all he needs to know some evening.

At least he admited it.

Pulp Hero wrote:At least he admited it.

You can't expect a judge to know everything. Granted, it's odd he wouldn't know about about websites, but it can't have been the first time a judge needed to have a technical concept explained to him. And he's aware of his shortcomings.

It's unfortunate and must be a pain for the defence, but I can't blame the judge for anything.

Bounty wrote:

Pulp Hero wrote:At least he admited it.

You can't expect a judge to know everything. Granted, it's odd he wouldn't know about about websites, but it can't have been the first time a judge needed to have a technical concept explained to him. And he's aware of his shortcomings.

It's unfortunate and must be a pain for the defence, but I can't blame the judge for anything.

That wasn't sarcasm, I think it was a good thing for him to go, "Whoa, what?" rather than just go on with the trial.

Kudos for him for actually admitting he has no idea about the subject matter. Better than if he'd just kept on and developed a warped understanding of the internet as automatically bad.

Even better if he'd called a recess and consulted in private with some impartial third parties. Rather than asking people with a necessary bias to provide wording that could be slanted one way or another.

This is going to develop into a larger problem as the Internet begins to take on its role as a truly global mass medium. Older generations resist change, so finding web-savvy justice is going to be a lot more difficult. Perhaps it is time...for Cyber-Court. *epic music*

Dalton wrote:This is going to develop into a larger problem as the Internet begins to take on its role as a truly global mass medium. Older generations resist change, so finding web-savvy justice is going to be a lot more difficult. Perhaps it is time...for Cyber-Court. *epic music*

Your leetness, I submit a defense of ROFLMAO, my client contends that what he did was simply too funny not to do...

Keevan_Colton wrote:

Dalton wrote:This is going to develop into a larger problem as the Internet begins to take on its role as a truly global mass medium. Older generations resist change, so finding web-savvy justice is going to be a lot more difficult. Perhaps it is time...for Cyber-Court. *epic music*

Your leetness, I submit a defense of ROFLMAO, my client contends that what he did was simply too funny not to do...

Judge: 101 i75 5upp053d 70 b ur 1337n355, nub.

three nerds in black say do not speak leet, there aree no leet speakers, or conspiracy theorists, or any naughty pictures on the internets, now look over here aat this pen in my pocket protector.

*red light flashes*
*bear takes off clip ons*

General Schatten wrote:

Keevan_Colton wrote:

Dalton wrote:This is going to develop into a larger problem as the Internet begins to take on its role as a truly global mass medium. Older generations resist change, so finding web-savvy justice is going to be a lot more difficult. Perhaps it is time...for Cyber-Court. *epic music*

Your leetness, I submit a defense of ROFLMAO, my client contends that what he did was simply too funny not to do...

Judge: 101 i75 5upp053d 70 b ur 1337n355, nub.

I feel sad that I can read that fluently.

This reminds me of the famous ‘monkey trial’ when neither the judge nor most of the jury had any idea what evolution actually was. Unfortunately the monkey trial was a staged event from the onset and the actual legal outcome never mattered much, which is hardly the case in this trial.

Hopefully this judge is intelligent enough that he’ll do a bit of research himself before returning to the courtroom.

Judges preside over trials involving things they don't understand all the time. So long as they don't do stupid shit like allow screenshots of file sharing services to be admitted as evidence, then great.