Rerun.....Legalese

Have you ever wondered why the Law is so complicated. Me too. If you have ever had the pleasure dealing with the criminal justice system you will know better first hand. I, fortunately have never had the pleasure directly, but have many time indirectly. I have worked with attorneys all over many States and testified in many cases and have concluded a great deal of the problems with the criminal justice system are statutes written in legaleze such that no one can understand them. Many criminal wrongs are obvious yet the perpetrators may be culpable and face punishment over a wide range due to the vagueness of the legaleze as to the "degree" to which they intended or did the act in question.

I believe a case could be made that every lawsuit is over varying interpretations of the same law or regulation! Even the criminal law is reduced to, as mentioned above, an argument, often, over not if the defendant "did" the act, but the act as he "did" it doesn't fit the statute. Read "Yea I killed him, but I didn't violate the murder statute, because I did ……."

There is a fairly easy fix for this problem, but its very simplicity probably dooms it to oblivion. This solution is to have laws written by good high-school teachers or other accomplished English majors. No attorney would like you to know but attorneys receive the same training in the use of the English language as do Phys. Ed. Majors. Think of your favorite Phys. Ed major and consider how you would like for him to author the rules of your life. Such rules which could dictate you spend your life in a cage as well as all aspects of your and your family's life.

Many of the citizenry assume that most if not all legislator are lawyers therefore nothing can be done. This is wrong and has been a very bad assumption in Tennessee for many years. In the Tennessee General Assembly, the House has 99 elected members and only 8 are attorneys plus one with a law degree but is a banker. The Senate has 33 members with only 8 lawyers plus one with a law degree but doesn't practice law. So to mount a campaign for change could hardly be stopped by attorneys in the legislature.

In the General Assembly, there is a Legal Services consisting of several lawyers and support staff. They write all bills and amendments that are requested by members. That is those not written by lobbyists, but that's for another day. If all but 2-3 of this group could be replaced by English majors, in time the statute books could actually become readable and understandable by all reasonable people. The two or three remaining attorneys could provide overview services as to form and format and provide opinions in committee meetings, as they do now, on the legality or constitutionality of bills and amendments as they come before the committees.

A quick example: TCA39-17-501(1) defines gambling as "…risking anything of value for a profit whose return is to any degree contingent on chance….." The first thing wrong here is there is no activity in our universe that does not contain an element of chance. Zero chance doesn't exist. Note the statute doesn't mention skill. While golf, baseball, football, soccer,……ad infinitum are certainly games where a great deal of skill is required to play them well, yet the outcome of each and every contest can and often does turn on chance. A star infielder who never commits an error, bobbles one and the winning score is scored; a top five golfer misses a short putt and loses; a top tennis player falls on match point as example.

In the gambling example read the statute and tell me the difference in betting on a UT football game and buying a share of stock. Both activities have the same elements and the same expectations. Please try to refrain from pithy, subjective and improper use of syntax to support an overly simplistic argument. The problem here is law enforcement and prosecutorial forces are allowed to decide what is gambling on an ad hoc basics which violates the First and Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and to the US Constitution which have come to guarantee due process and equal protection under the law. And violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine as outlined in Articles I, II and III of the Constitution.

To us this is an academic exercise, but to one who is facing up to 5 years in prison for law enforcements subjective interpretation of this statute, the way the statute is written and accepted by the Courts is scary.