<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: This is justice?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://povertyblog.net/2009/03/30/this-is-justice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://povertyblog.net/2009/03/30/this-is-justice/</link>
	<description>understanding trends and what to do about them</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:17:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenny</title>
		<link>http://povertyblog.net/2009/03/30/this-is-justice/#comment-116</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jenny]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 21:16:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://povertyblog.net/?p=378#comment-116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Bill,

I just served on a civil jury as well. I finished the experience feeling very frustrated by the fact that those who can afford good attorneys to litigate instead of finding a solution through arbitration or mediation are able to bring frivolous cases to our court system that inconvenience 13 people and burden taxpayers through the use of the court&#039;s time. In this case, neither individual was blameless, and yet because our society allows it, they could sue one another for damages in a jury trial. 

After the verdict the judge gave us all a brief sermon on the importance of trial by jury in our democracy, but in this case I struggled to see the connection. 

I&#039;m sorry you were similarly disappointed by your jury experience. Certainly, those with less are disadvantaged to a greater degree than those with the pockets deep enough to afford high priced lawyers. If it were up to me, we would be like New Zealand and limit people&#039;s &quot;right&quot; to sue! 

Thanks again for your blog!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Bill,</p>
<p>I just served on a civil jury as well. I finished the experience feeling very frustrated by the fact that those who can afford good attorneys to litigate instead of finding a solution through arbitration or mediation are able to bring frivolous cases to our court system that inconvenience 13 people and burden taxpayers through the use of the court&#8217;s time. In this case, neither individual was blameless, and yet because our society allows it, they could sue one another for damages in a jury trial. </p>
<p>After the verdict the judge gave us all a brief sermon on the importance of trial by jury in our democracy, but in this case I struggled to see the connection. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry you were similarly disappointed by your jury experience. Certainly, those with less are disadvantaged to a greater degree than those with the pockets deep enough to afford high priced lawyers. If it were up to me, we would be like New Zealand and limit people&#8217;s &#8220;right&#8221; to sue! </p>
<p>Thanks again for your blog!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Big Brother</title>
		<link>http://povertyblog.net/2009/03/30/this-is-justice/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Big Brother]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://povertyblog.net/?p=378#comment-96</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sounds like the &quot;inequality&quot; was due to the woman not getting a very good lawyer.  He probably went after the homeowner under his homeowner&#039;s insurance.  He could have sued the owner of the dog, but perhaps there wasn&#039;t adequate insurance to make it worth his while.  The legal system is not perfect, but it works pretty well, all things considered.  The attorney was probably working on a contingency anyway, so it&#039;s possible he didn&#039;t get anything out of the case anyway.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like the &#8220;inequality&#8221; was due to the woman not getting a very good lawyer.  He probably went after the homeowner under his homeowner&#8217;s insurance.  He could have sued the owner of the dog, but perhaps there wasn&#8217;t adequate insurance to make it worth his while.  The legal system is not perfect, but it works pretty well, all things considered.  The attorney was probably working on a contingency anyway, so it&#8217;s possible he didn&#8217;t get anything out of the case anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

