Edit Feedback

Justice

Societal metrics demonstrate the idea of assessing different systems, but require a lot more work and research to be usable. Assessing DC is attempting to apply the metrics using general knowledge and logic. The ultimate goal is to have metrics that are purely assessed with data. For now this is a very draft approximation.

DC is pretty good with justice in that the courts and the jury system tends to be quite impartial. However it does have a few problems.

Money Buys Legal Power

A person with more money has the ability to get high priced lawyers who have a bigger chance of winning a legal/criminal battle. A completely fair system would provide equal legal rights to everyone. This can be particularly bad when defendants have to use public defenders. One 2009 study found that public defenders in the US only had 7 minutes to spend per case.

The Letter Of The Law Above ‘Good’

Following the letter of the law for judging a case can have some positive and negative consequences. On the positive side it should remove the personal bias of those judging, since they only need to consider the details of the relevant laws. The bad is that the law is always trying to play catch up, as laws can be out of date to new and novel situations. The other issue is that legal loopholes can allow for unjust decisions when common sense is enough to know what the ‘right’ decision is.

For example it is seems the crimes committed in Yellowstone national park cannot be prosecuted due to a legal loophole

The Result

In DC money is a crucial component in which side wins a legal battle, thus it has a limited version of justice.

Assessment: 5/10