#TechnologyForJudges

[geeksfromfuture-blog]

Can Technology Change Judges?

"Can Technology Change Judges?" is a well known question in the legal profession. Is it possible to change the way we judge a person, a case or even a legal institution? There are plenty of people who would like to try. Should we even consider such a drastic idea, or does it just mean another set of guidelines for judges to consider? We have heard about individuals who use the Internet to pick the most suitable judge in their area or to easily locate legal institutions near them. In some ways this is pretty logical. Of course, it's true that it is possible to find the best judge within your area, but if they're all selected from one company and you'll have to pay more, does it really make sense? Of course not. The primary reason is that you'll be exposed to only a few. On the other hand, it might be beneficial to you if there were certain criteria that would prevent you from selecting the same judge over again. It may seem reasonable to impose a limit to what the lawyers' selection process might be like, but it's the simple fact that you wouldn't want to go through all the same results each time. What happens when you select the same judge in a different state? When did it all start? All of these questions are fair enough, but they really should not hold any importance. There is no doubt that some of us in the United Kingdom have found it difficult to decide whether to put up with a session at the magistrates court, or go out for a live television coverage of the trial on the Internet. While one's experiences will vary, surely one should be able to rest assured that the decision has been made by all the judges in the area. There is really no reason why the results shouldn't be produced in different mediums. Perhaps then there would be less deliberation when it comes to selecting the best judge. As it stands, we're not sure if the technology can even replicate the procedure in a courtroom and if it can, it needs to be applied at the highest level in the country. It would certainly be interesting to know if judges' views have changed in the last five years, because what we've experienced up to now might have been unique. It seems to me that it could be possible to increase the accuracy of the system by including in the system different results, each of which would only be considered valid under the new criteria. This would allow the system to reflect reality, but it would also give the judges more room to find the perfect match for the case. Let's face it, judges just love to be right. They get annoyed at mistakes they didn't see, but they're also just very happy to be able to make a decision, even if it means making an unreasonable one.

Will Technology Change Judges?

Will technology change judges? If we are looking at an array of areas of the law, I believe it can and it will. Most of the cases that we see now in courtrooms are a result of technological advances. Everything from DNA testing to hiring a private investigator for investigative purposes are used as a result of new technology in the legal system. Can the judicial system become obsolete as a result of the use of new technology? If there is no longer any need for trained people to explain how the legal system works, then it will. Inevitably, technological advances will also cause some movement away from the "old" ways of doing things. There are two technological trends that have caught the attention of courts around the world. One is about a product and the other is about what a judge has to do. Will technology change judges? Recently, a federal appeals court ruled that a warrant was needed for cell phone tracking by mobile phone companies. A court had ruled in a case that GPS tracking was legal only if a warrant was issued. The opinion issued by the third circuit court of appeals is that warrants are required for tracking cell phones. This decision is not legally binding, but it is an electronic form of precedent. Should this decision be adopted by other courts in the country, judges will have to rely on the decision of the three circuit court. A second case arose when an accused person used such technology to track his own actions. As a result, a judge had to rule in a case about whether the defendant had broken the law. The software that the government bought to track the movements of mobile phone users was sold for business use. But because this software had been used for commercial purposes, the information was in fact public records. When the software was sold to the government, they had to adhere to the terms and conditions they had promised to uphold in the original contract. The software is not available for public purchase because of privacy concerns, but in this case the prosecutors were not interested in anything but the mobile phone location of the victim. The FBI has a long history of using this type of software. The third example of technology moving us away from the courtroom occurred when one of the defendants had Internet access to Google maps. A "trial by satellite" was called. Because of the technical difficulties of having access to the internet from space, this case is a rarity. This is a case where a legal proceeding was not attended by the defendant's lawyers, but instead by their potential jury pool. The knowledge that technology is reaching out into the public square is very disturbing. Will technology change the legal system? It is too early to tell, but it is becoming more evident that law-abiding citizens are going to be forced to seek out ways to defend themselves.

Read the full article

[geeksfromfuture-blog]

Can Technology End Judges?

Can technology end judges? Do you think that these days, the technology will lead to the end of human judges? I was surprised to hear this, because when I was growing up, judges were known to be modern day judges, but still very much like them; perhaps because they are aware of technology. Because humans can give judgments at any time, they can judge, except for the most serious or critical situations, including all the cases that might need a law judge. As a result, human judges will not have to be present in every courtroom because their presence is necessary. Sometimes, all the judges will be working from home. However, this is only possible because of the technological innovations. Every time a judge is given a new invention, it reduces his workload by almost half. For example, he might make use of a ruling system called the "WebJudge". This tool allows him to judge cases without physically going to the courtroom. A computerized system helps him to give instructions and even order around a trial. In addition, another invention called WebRule allows a judge to give legal advice to an organization based on the ruling system. These systems will be able to transmit the messages to various parties. The system lets the judge make the decision about the case with the least amount of emotion involved. What will happen is that the judge will issue an instruction to a number of parties, and then they will be responsible for carrying out the rules. It has been said that these inventions will eliminate unnecessary red tape. At the same time, they will enhance efficiency. One of the advantages of this system is that it is very simple. There is no need for a good deal of rules and regulations, and it also removes the uncertainty ofa trial. The trial will not take place unless the judge decides to make it so. He does not need to stay in the courthouse and wait for the accused to appear. Many people feel that this is another way of replacing a law judge. Because they will be able to do everything from home, they will become easy targets for terrorists. However, the convenience that this system will provide is also another good reason why it is very useful. It saves time and money, and all the judges will be able to handle cases more effectively. Human judges will be able to review the entire case, to weigh the evidence and also the argument presented in court. That is why I feel that the jury would have to be redesigned and its members could be replaced with judges. In addition, the lawyers will no longer have to confront a law judge in court, although this system is not perfect. They still need to decide who wins and loses the case. Technology will not be able to end judges. Therefore, I hope you will enjoy this article and consider all the information contained within.

Will Technology End Judges?

The future of the court may depend on how a judge rules for his future colleagues. We live in an age where technology is changing our daily lives in very fast ways. Everything from our work at home to our social networking and social media to our security systems have become far more sophisticated and technologically advanced. Many people, judges included, do not like the idea of losing out to new technology in the growing court administration and judiciary system. So what should happen if this trend continues and judges are unable to keep up with the latest in technology and how should we replace these judges? In some countries the courts are becoming old fashioned and out of date and while there are many technological advances that still make it easier to work in a court, people might be looking for an alternative solution that would allow us to continue our work in the court system as we have always done. This option does not necessarily need to mean the end of the traditional court system but it could certainly mean the end of the judge in the courtroom. How would we do it? If we cannot do everything ourselves why not let someone else do it for us? How about if we could all work as a team instead of an individual team member? While it may seem to some people that this can only be a good thing for the judicial system, there are probably those who worry about the side effects. Could it cause so much disruption in the lives of those who were being replaced and where would the money come from to pay for such an overhaul? What if this did not work and the same people who had been replaced by the workaholic, the student who was now a working adult did not find a way to cope and might even suffer negative consequences from the upheaval? If we had a plan that allowed all of us to take a turn in this work sharing idea what would be the impact? It is difficult to predict what the impact would be, but people have lived long enough to understand what happens when changes are made to their livelihoods. Perhaps we are old enough to know the repercussions. Perhaps, people who were once core workers would have a chance to see where they fit in and perhaps that can open up the possibility of helping people to find a balance between work and life. Just think of all the time that one person could spend working on home, being with their family or doing some other productive activity. Another part of this idea could be for people to have a second job in order to supplement their main income. Busy lifestyles are killing us. With our busy lifestyles we seem to take fewer vacations and time off and spend more time at home and at work. In some cases we have more stress, more to worry about and more responsibilities than ever before. Perhaps this will help to get attention when there is talk of the judicial system being undermined by technology and we can look back at this as being an exciting and thought provoking thought. Imagine a future where the judge is not the judge anymore and a technology solution is brought to the forefront and takes over. It is not a black and white scenario but one that can present a lot of opportunities and can lead to change in the judicial system. Imagine if there was a solution that actually allowed the judge to be part of the working team of the people who were being replaced by technology. Imagine how this could be a motivating factor and motivator for a person to keep at their job and to put up with all the stress that goes along with having to meet targets and report every day to the office. Imagine how much faster they could get results in terms of what they are doing. Will technology end judges? How would it change your business and how would it change your life? Well that is something you will have to answer for yourself.

Read the full article

[geeksfromfuture-blog]

Can Technology Save Judges?

What does technology have to do with the future of judges? Is it possible for judges to be able to check out their cases, judge it and determine whether or not a particular case can go forward. There are a number of interesting observations that have been made as to what has happened in regards to technology in regards to the court system. For instance, in many cases, juries find evidence that has not been presented in the courtroom. The judge has allowed it. It is only through technology that the case can be presented in the court room, not through a computer that would be sitting in front of the judge. However, in many instances, judges have suggested that the computers might be distracting for jurors because of the colorful images of the game consoles that have been used. The reality is that this is just the most visible part of the issue. The issue that is being talked about is how technology can help, not only in enhancing the quality of the courtroom, but also how it can help people who are involved in the case involve. If this is done properly, the jurors will more than likely not be distracted. They will be focused on the case and on the evidence that they need to find. If the information is really presented in a way that allows the judge to see all of the case, then the evidence can be made easier to read. This would mean less time on the clerk's desk and more time to hear the case. Judges can look at case files with less distractions. It is expected that they will look at the things that they need to do in terms of the evidence. It is expected that they will be able to make more meaningful decisions from the trial. The electronic presentation of information through video format is another tool that can be used to help the judge to do his job. This will allow them to see everything that the evidence contains, whether or not the judge decides that a certain piece of information is relevant or not. This is done in real time. Judges will then be able to make decisions. Not just an initial decision, but to review the evidence and the case based on the evidence presented, with a lot more weight to be given to evidence. Although the technology has not been used yet in courts, there are those who believe that it can help judges do their jobs better. All judges should consider this as technology becomes more advanced. If judges are constantly impressed by the technology that is introduced into the courtroom, then a problem will not occur. I think that any time that technology is used in the courthouse, judges should carefully examine what it does, and if it can benefit them. If they are not given the opportunity to do this, then the technology will be looked at as a distraction and not a help. We are at a point in time where the use of these technologies should not be a concern. However, it is up to the judges to ensure that the technology used in the courtroom does not hinder them from doing their jobs.

Will Technology Save Judges?

Will technology save judges? Yes, it will! It's been proven time again that judges in the current legal system are underpaid, overworked, and undervalued. In fact, there is currently a class action lawsuit filed against the US Court of Appeals. The latest lawsuit revolves around a federal appeals court which, according to legal websites, is "The New York Times of the US." This federal appeals court, as well as most of the other appellate courts in the country, rules on the cases that come before them. The main court of appeals is one of the most important courts in the nation. There is more to this lawsuit than a lack of salesmanship. Consider the following: The complaints against the court (as with most appellate courts) center on the long and tedious "time consuming" process of sending out the various petitions that are submitted to the court. Although some of these claims may be true, the lengthy and at times disorganized process is certainly not a reason to deny the most fundamental aspect of our judicial system--our judges. It's a fact that the appeals court has recently had its budget cut by the House Appropriations Committee. To pay for this shortfall, however, the panel decided to eliminate grants intended to help litigants obtain attorney compensation in their legal cases. There is also a need to ensure that the court system is able to deal with the vast amount of data that is coming through the mail. Most people do not realize this but the court system houses hundreds of thousands of cases. These cases are not ranked in order of importance and must be put into chronological order. One of the main concerns that is raised by the court is that the level of communication is essential to maintaining the public trust. Simply put, what happens if a judge decides that a criminal defendant was actually innocent? What is a judge supposed to do with all of this new system? Obviously, no one wants to hear that they are going to be expected to submit to the whims of a "reformer." The Americans, and indeed many other folks around the world, feel as though the system is broken. They see a group of men and women who seem to have absolutely no direction or purpose and seem to view any changes that are made to the legal system as positive measures to improve things. For the past two years, we have seen the slow demise of this system and the clamor to get it back to its rightful place. Please consider all this and think on it.

Read the full article