Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
That would make it reality, not imaginary. Real examples exist.
Either there is one version of the law or judges can decide whatever they choose. Which is it? When you have decisions going clearly against the law and it's intent, it's not one version of the law.
|
Tell us you have no idea of how the Law works without telling us you have no idea how the Law works
It goes a little bit like this:
Solicitor 1: “My interpretation of the Law is my client has had his human rights breached because of XYZ reasons”
Solicitor 2: “My interpretation of the Law is no human rights have been breached because ABC reasons”
Judge: “Looking at all the evidence my ruling is
*insert agreement with Solicitor 1 or 2 here*.”
Get it now?