Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, I am in favor of the adversary system.

    I think presenting the case to a jury or impartial third party in general is a more just and fair system towards the accused, I think we should by all means protect the accused and the adversary system gives them a much more fair chance then a system where the judges have more power.

  • I prefer it

    This seems preferable to an inquisatory system whereby the judges and investigators would just be looking into a situation to gather evidence an render judgment. The adversary system allows for both sides to state their cases and get the truth out. It seems wrong for a defender to not speak for themselves.

  • Yes, the adversarial system of justice is the best option.

    Currently, this is the best system of justice available to us. It ensures that both sides get to voice their views on a matter. Problems arise when the mediators, such as the judges, are not totally impartial. As long as objectivity is maintained the adversary system works as well as anything else in deciding cases.

  • Yes I Do

    The adversary system is used within the United States. When a person is at trial they or their representatives defend against the charging authority and a decision is made either by a judge or a jury. I feel like this system has worked well in its most basic form. I think the current system in America is overloaded with lawyers, but that doesn't mean the system is bad.

  • No, I'm not in favor of the adversary system.

    I am not in favor of the adversary system. I think that such a system is bit flawed and can cause a lot of problems and issues. I think that the system we have right now in the judicial system works just fine for us. I do not see any need for a system where there can be a bit of bias.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.