During the Civil War, doctors were mostly civilians who signed contracts to serve the Army by treating the wounded. Some were officers and eventually the Medical Corps was organized to deliver care. At times there are still contract surgeons (all military doctors are called “surgeons”)serving in the Army, especially since the doctor draft ended with the general draft. There is a huge number of lawyers currently serving in the military and it seems as though they are becoming increasingly obstructive in allowing the military to complete its mission.
Now, however, a Navy lawyer has essentially released a terrorist into the civilian population with his sentencing decision in the Hamdan case. He will be out in time to plan a bombing for New Years.
Tags: Guantanamo, Hamdan
Lawyers being obstructive is not a criticism, it’s a job description. Even assuming most are good people of good character, their mission whether in criminal or civil cases is to game the system, or at minimum, obstruct and delay the judicial process on behalf of their client. On the other side, you have the Nifongs doing their version of gaming the system. Even the good prosecutors are advocates of what I’ll euphemistically refer to as a ‘strong defense’. Makes sense, in that, they all went to the same law schools, and later the same parties, same bars, same clubs. Best one can do is stay off their radar.
And I’m not ranting here, or even being judgmental. It’s just being observant. Justice is not a priority of the justice system. The system is. Just watch them toil over the most arcane artifacts of legal jargon on Patterico or other law blogs. None will accept justice being served without the law being served first. And since it’s always a battle over what exactly that ‘law’ is on any given day…
I’d be the worst attorney ever.
I’ll echo what allan said.
There seems to be a little too much cheering when the guilty are acquitted, some sort of rebellion against the system, like a teenager rejecting their parents values. Also involved is “cheering for the underdog”, which I imagine stems from our hope that we could beat the rap if ever charged.
I often wonder about the modern attorney advocating for one such as Hamdan: the attorney’s station in life is almost entirely dependent upon the rule of law and Western values that one such as Hamdan hopes to upend entirely. So the attorney appears to further the destruction of the very system that gave him his station in life.
DB, that is exactly my opinion. The judge is the one I have the largest beef with. With this sort of performance by military tribunals, why bother ?