Power of Story Send a Tweet        
- Advertisement -

Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 1 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 1 Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 5 (7 Shares)  

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   26 comments
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

The Courtroom's Little Lie: It's About The Whole Truth

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Sylvia Clute       (Page 1 of 2 pages)     Permalink

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 1   Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H2 9/14/10

Author 52375
Become a Fan
  (20 fans)
- Advertisement -

After you spend a little time in the courtroom, you realize that the ritual of having the witnesses swear to tell the truth is too often more about form than substance. An attorney once told me that he objected to the testimony being offered by a witness in a divorce case on the grounds the witness was lying. The judge retorted, "This is a divorce suit. Everyone lies." The case droned on.

Why, after years of hearing divorce cases, would a judge so readily dismiss the objection that a witness was lying? Because in this win-lose arena, we make the stakes so high that people often rationalize that telling a little white lie in their case is less wrong than what they might lose if they tell the truth. The way the system is set it promotes lying, and even honest people sometimes do.

- Advertisement -

Consider what can be at stake in a divorce suit. First of all, you can lose custody of your children. You might lose your home or your business. The IRS might come after you if your spouse testifies about income that you never reported. Your spouse might report illegal drug use, especially relevant in a custody case. Placing broken families, people who used to love and trust one another, in this adversarial arena is wrong. It is not a safe space and it can make the family rift even worse.

- Advertisement -

Because lying is often rewarded and the truth punished, so much lying takes place that the system would break down if we took perjury seriously. This is why the judge disregarded the attorney's objection. Only cases like Bill Clinton stretching the truth are pursued.

In contrast, consider instead what happens in the unitive justice arena. Let's look at how attorneys trained in collaborative law might handle a divorce case.

- Advertisement -

Collaborative Law is a non-adversarial process that seeks a win-win resolution for everyone. Non-adversarial does not mean that attorneys are not involved. Each client is represented by an attorney, but the attorneys give their advice in the presence of the other side. They are to give the best legal advice they can, not to manipulate and scheme so their clients alone will benefit. Neutral advisors may be called upon to give fair and impartial advice to both parties. The goal is for everyone to have the same information when making decisions.

Next Page  1  |  2


- Advertisement -

Must Read 1   Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Moral Dilemma of Military Service

Lessons from the Stanford Prison Experiment

Time for Another Civil Rights Movement?

Punitive Justice Distilled: the Stanford Prison Experiment

The Death Penalty: Un-Christian Barbarism

How Did Our Criminal Law System Become So Broken?