MAY 31, 2022 – (Cont.) “But that’s only half the problem. The other half is our quintessentially human subjectivity. You can see it played out a million ways every day. In the face of complete, accurate, empirical data and iron-clad logic, people still succumb to subjective judgment.
“In this regard I’m reminded of a conversation I had with a friend who was a leading litigator in our local legal community. For months he’d been preparing for the jury trial of a billion-dollar case. Leaving no stone unturned, the team he was leading hired a nationally renowned consulting firm to advise on how to pick the jury, how to fashion the opening statement, examine witnesses, respond to and raise anticipated objections, and how to present the closing argument.
“The most disturbing aspect of the exercise was the lead consultant’s disclosure that according to extensive research, most jurors made up their minds about a case after the voir dire—the jury selection process—but before the opening statements were given or any evidence had been introduced.”
“This might be a little off-topic,” said the alien, “but tell me more about . . . what did you call it, ‘a jury trial in a billion-dollar case’?”
“It’s an Anglo-American Baroque dance performed by hired guns in the presence of a high priest wearing a black robe and with the willing and unwilling participation of a cast of characters and often boatloads of documents, all designed to ‘get at the truth’ and achieve thereby some semblance of justice in a world where precious little of it prevails. It involves the allocation of major resources—wealth—to establish, ironically, how a very large gain or loss of wealth is, in turn, to be allocated.”
“Wow!” The alien’s filaments flashed nervously, accompanied by frenetic humming.
“Yes, I know. A jury trial is part of a much larger system premised on facts (data), reasoning, and an established framework of rules and regulations called ‘the law.’ The catch-all term for the system is ‘jurisprudence.’ In theory, it’s supposed to be firmly grounded in fact-finding (purview of the jurors) and application of the law (bailiwick of the high priest). In practice, however, outcomes often turn on the color of the tie worn by one or the other ‘hired guns’ or a hemorrhoidal flare-up experienced by the high priest or a memory lapse (honest or otherwise) on the part of a witness or a host of other factors unrelated to the admissible facts and applicable law.”
The alien hummed and pulsated even more urgently. “Something wrong?” I asked.
“No . . . it’s just that I’m getting the impression that yours is a complicated species.”
“To be sure! You’d have to live here much longer, observing and interacting with humans, to understand us. Remember, we number close to eight billion, most living in close quarters to one another, each soul with an independent brain, thoughts and impulses. Moreover, we’ve organized ourselves into a multitude of competing groups. Characteristics that typify and bind one tribe don’t necessarily exist among another. Furthermore, thoughts and behaviors of one moment will be displaced by radically different synapses and actions in the next—even within a single individual. Trust me—some people you just can’t trust, and not necessarily because they’re dishonest.” (Cont.)
(Remember to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.)
© 2022 by Eric Nilsson
