Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by DannyBee 4701 days ago
"In short, that allows a lawyer to answer almost any question with "it depends," and start billing. "

No, this is usually "lack of sufficient facts to answer question".

If a crime has 4 elements, and you've said you've committed 3 and maybe the 4th depending on how you look at it, the answer to the question "can i be convicted" is "it depends", because it depends on the argument about the 4th element.

If your followup is to claim that there should never be questions about whether you've achieved some element of a crime, it should be binary, that's simply impossible.

Crimes, for example, are often about intent and causation. Until science provides us with historical mind reading devices, and completely accurate point-in-time reconstruction of the world, we're going to have to rely on various theories and evidence (much like science relies on theories and evidence).

Even point-in-time reconstruction wouldn't solve all causation issues, because the issue is often a fairness one: Is it fair to hold the defendant liable for a crime X steps removed from his own action.

1 comments

Right. It should be noted that appellate practice, which is really where the big debates about legal interpretation happen, the "what does this comma mean" work, is not exactly a cash cow for the industry. It's a brand-building practice, but outside boutiques it's not what pays the rent. What pays the rent is factual disputes, where its pretty clear what the law is, but there is disagreement about who did what with what intent and how much did it cost.