Thr judge could have ordered him released and pushed the burden of an appeal onto the state. Definitely the right thing to do when an innocent man is imprisoned.
Yeah. This is why we have judges. A really surprisingly large amount of a judge’s job is looking at the situation and saying, more or less, “You know what? That’s a bunch of bullshit. Here’s what we’re going to do.”
That’s the whole reason there is “precedent” and then sometimes precedent gets overturned. They’re just using their, you know… judgement. There’s a whole interplay of written laws vs. what happened before vs. what should happen now, it’s not just like the judge is the CPU and then they execute the law like a program and then output a judgement.
The tolerance for “it’s a loophole” or “it’s a glitch” as an excuse from human beings with power and agency in a system that’s never been built assuming it would be run by a computer is way too high.
That would be the moral thing to do, but not the legal thing to do. Simply put, the judge doesn’t have the jurisdiction and they would have to knowingly break the law to let the person go. Yes, it is ridiculous.
I think we have to entertain the very real possibility that most of these judges are under duress. I bet some of them received a few pictures or videos of themselves or their family members during candid moments…
Thr judge could have ordered him released and pushed the burden of an appeal onto the state. Definitely the right thing to do when an innocent man is imprisoned.
Yeah. This is why we have judges. A really surprisingly large amount of a judge’s job is looking at the situation and saying, more or less, “You know what? That’s a bunch of bullshit. Here’s what we’re going to do.”
That’s the whole reason there is “precedent” and then sometimes precedent gets overturned. They’re just using their, you know… judgement. There’s a whole interplay of written laws vs. what happened before vs. what should happen now, it’s not just like the judge is the CPU and then they execute the law like a program and then output a judgement.
The tolerance for “it’s a loophole” or “it’s a glitch” as an excuse from human beings with power and agency in a system that’s never been built assuming it would be run by a computer is way too high.
That would be the moral thing to do, but not the legal thing to do. Simply put, the judge doesn’t have the jurisdiction and they would have to knowingly break the law to let the person go. Yes, it is ridiculous.
I think we have to entertain the very real possibility that most of these judges are under duress. I bet some of them received a few pictures or videos of themselves or their family members during candid moments…
Or…the judge is a racist.
Occam’s Razor