Why is the adversary system of law a necessity to produce results?
Best Answer:
It isn't necessary to produce results. Most scholars have concluded that Civil Law Systems (often referred to as Napoleonic, though it is used by various countries around the world) produce both more just and more accurate legal outcomes. Their goal is to produce the truth fairly than simply decide who is the better lawyer. U.S. Law is based on British Common Law which be adopted officially in the U.S. contained by 1787. The U.S. system encourages defendants to hide the truth in instruct to escape justice. Currently Louisiana functions with a hybrid of Napoleonic and Common Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/labor-employment-law-alternative-dispute-resolution/8919665-1.html
It is necessary because if it be a system where one person was believe to be, jury, and executioner, we could be pinning crimes on the wrong people and not even know it. When the state has good prosecutors, and someone get the best defense possible, it ensures that all the evidence is properly submitted and we got the right individual. And it also protects society as a whole from wrongful prosecutions, and from corrupt people in power who may basically have a vendetta against someone. Although the system isn't always perfect, it's better than the alternative. EDIT: I approaching Zapata's succinct answer. They basically said what I wanted to say surrounded by three words. Nice job.
